Book of Difficulties

MAXIMUS ON THE VARIOUS DIFFICULT PASSAGES OF THE HOLY DIONYSIUS AND GREGORY TO THOMAS THE SANCTIFIED

To the most holy servant of God, spiritual father and master, Lord Thomas, Maximus the humble, a sinner, an unworthy servant and disciple.

You have always been so engaged with divine matters, with such intensity of study, that you appear to have attained a sure and unchangeable habit of contemplation. Through this, most beloved man of God, you pursue not only wisdom, but the very beauty of wisdom with a certain sober love. Now, the beauty of wisdom is knowledge conjoined with action, or action wisely ordered. Moreover, from these two, as if blooming from both, a character is born, which I would call the contemplation of divine providence and judgment. Just as you, too, have instilled the mind into sense through the Spirit, and have clearly taught the reason according to which God is understood to have created man in His own image, and at the same time have manifested the riches of His kindness, having shown—through that most beautiful mixture of things, naturally disjoined, which is perceived in you—that God can be embodied in virtues, ^B whose height you, by measure of imitation, have not disdained to bring down to [the level of] me through your condescension, seeking those things of which you yourself have already had the experience and knowledge.

There are ^C chapters of those holy men, Dionysius and Gregory, both most highly praised and—

^A long-blessed, whom I am wont to count among the most holy and celebrated. I judge them, indeed, to be among those chosen from above, whom God has drawn to Himself according to that predefinition of the ages. I believe them to have possessed the entire abundance of wisdom that can possibly fall to men. I consider that they, by this life which is according to nature, attained to the very essence of the soul, and so, in a manner of speaking, found Christ Himself living within them—or, to say something even greater, that Christ became the soul of their soul, and openly exhibited all their deeds, words, and thoughts as His own; so that it is no longer fitting to believe that what is proposed arises from them, but rather from Christ Himself, who speaks within them through condescension. But in the meantime, who am I, to take the Lord Jesus upon my lips, when I have not yet received the spirit of sanctification? How shall I speak of the virtues of the Lord, I who have a stammering tongue ^B and carry a mind immersed in corruptible things? How shall I, who am mute, proclaim even the least of His praises? How, I who have the ears of my soul completely closed—out of excessive love for the passions—could I possibly proclaim that blessed voice? How am I to overcome the world, I who have long been overcome by the world? Nay rather, I am found to be clearly reconciled to the world; for in me nothing else can be detected than a constant propensity toward matter and nature. It would be, in short, of the highest audacity if I, filthy, were to touch holy men, and if I, unclean, were to contaminate those who are most pure. Wherefore I would have altogether denied obedience to your commands, fearing the reproach of rashness, had I not feared the danger of disobedience even more. Placed, therefore, in the middle of these two, I choose to appear rash (for this part is more pardonable) rather than disobedient, the fault of which I deem less likely to obtain pardon. Trusting, ^C therefore, in the benevolence of all the saints, and in the help of your prayers, I will respond to each chapter as briefly as I can, with Christ as my guide, who is the great God and our Savior, and who will grant us both to think piously and to speak opportunely. We have, indeed, to do with a Master who can grant great things even to the little ones. I will begin, therefore, with the most divine Gregory, because he is considered to be closer to us in time.

Of the holy Gregory the Theologian, from his first discourse on the Son, concerning the word: « Wherefore the unity from the beginning moved into a duality and stood in the Trinity. » And again, from his second discourse on Peace: « In unity, ^D indeed, moved by reason of riches...

but having gone beyond the duality—for it is beyond the matter and form from which bodies consist—and having been defined by the Trinity, by reason of perfection. » ^A

If, servant of God, having observed what seems to be a dissonance in these words, you have been at a loss for their true harmony, you cannot find any that is more connective to the meaning of these terms. For it is the same thing to have gone beyond a dyad and not to have stopped at a dyad, and again to be defined as a Trinity and for the motion of the Monad to have stopped at the Trinity, provided that we do not cherish ^B a monarchy that is devoid of ambition, as if circumscribed in one person, or again, one that is disordered, as if flowing into infinity; but rather, that the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—which is equal in essence and in honor, constitutes a unity of being; the full riches of which is that harmonious union and the same radiant splendor, so that the Godhead neither flows forth beyond these—lest we introduce a multitude of gods—nor is it restricted within them, lest we be condemned for imposing poverty upon the Godhead.

These things, therefore, are not an *aetiology* to explain that Cause which transcends the essences of all things, but merely a declaration of pious opinion regarding It. For strictly speaking, the Godhead is a Monad, and not a dyad; it is also a Trinity, but not a multitude. For It is without beginning, bodiless, and free from all sedition. And the Monad is, in reality, a Monad ^C (for it is not a principle of those things which are after it, through a contraction of division, as if it naturally tended and poured itself forth into a multitude, but it is that which uniquely subsists in the consubstantial Trinity): and the Trinity is, in reality, a Trinity, not indeed compounded of discrete number, as if it were a collection of units which would be subject to division, but it is a uni-essential substance of unity, in which there are three hypostases; for the unity is the Trinity, because such is its essence, and the Trinity is also the unity, because in such a way it subsists, since the Godhead is one in the unity of essence and in the Trinity of subsistence.

If, however, upon hearing of "motion," you have wondered how the Godhead, which is contained by no limits, can be moved, you must know that this affection ^D is not from the Godhead Itself, but from us. For thus does the explanation of its first essence manifest itself to us, and thus are we illuminated regarding the manner in which It subsists. For, in cognition, *to be* is prior to *to be in this manner*. The motion of the Godhead, therefore, is its knowledge, through which, to those who are capable of it, both Its being and the manner of Its subsistence are declared.

The same author, in his first discourse on the Son, at the passage: « To condense the matter into a few words, this is what you must do: attribute the higher expressions to the Godhead and to that Nature which is

free from passions and body, and the lower ones to...

^A the composite [Nature], and to the One who for your sake emptied Himself and was incarnate, and—there is nothing wrong with saying this—was made human.

The Word of God was entirely full in essence, inasmuch as He is God, and was entirely complete in hypostasis, inasmuch as He is the Son. When He emptied Himself, He sowed to Himself His own flesh, and by an ineffable conception, coalescing with the flesh which He had assumed, He granted it His own hypostasis. And thus, by this new mystery, the Word became entirely, without mutation, man, and the same was the hypostasis of two natures, the uncreated and the created, the impassible and the passible, so that He received all the natural principles of those natures, of which He was the hypostasis, without exception. ^B If, therefore, He received the natural principles of all those of which He was the hypostasis, essentially, once He had become composite by the assumption of the flesh according to hypostasis, the very wise Teacher—in order that [Christ] might not be thought of as a mere man—ascribed to Him the sufferings of His own flesh, since the flesh was His own, and through it God was truly passible for the sake of sin. Therefore, the Teacher, wishing to show the difference between the essence—according to which the Word of God remained simple even when incarnate—and the hypostasis—according to which He became composite by the assumption of the flesh, and was called passible in the economy of salvation—says these words: "Lest by attributing what belongs to the hypostasis, we might, through ignorance of the nature, fall into ^C worshipping God as passible by nature, like the Arians."

And he added "and made human," not only because of the Arians, who posit the Godhead in place of a soul, or the Apollinarians, who dogmatize that Christ is "without mind" (and who in this way slice away the perfection of the Word’s nature according to us, and make Him passible in His Godhead, and indeed naturally so), but also in order that the Only-begotten God might be shown to us to have truly become perfect man, and to have wrought our salvation through Himself in a flesh that acted naturally and possessed a soul endowed with mind and reason. For He truly became man in all things, sin alone excepted—of which no principle is sown in nature at all—but not without natural operation. For by that operation the principle of the essence of each thing, in which it resides, is naturally ^D defined. For whatever is affirmed commonly and generically of any things defines their essence, and consequently their essence is destroyed if they are entirely lacking in it. For nothing remains to be what it was if it is deprived of its own natural perfections.

From the same, from the same oration, on that passage: "For this one who is now despised by you was formerly above you: who now

^A became as if he were deprived of his own natural perfections and simplicity! For he remained what he was, and took on what he was not. In the beginning he was without cause (for what cause can be brought forward for God?), but later he also came to be for a cause; and the cause was your own salvation, you who are the insulter—you who despise the divinity for this reason, that he accepted your density, through an intervening mind conversing with flesh, and became a man, the lower God, since he was leavened together with God and became one, the superior part prevailing, so that I might become as much God as he is man."

For this one who—it is said—is now despised by you, there was a time when he was also above you, existing of course beyond every age and every nature [107 a] by himself, even if he now, out of a desire for your sake, has been placed under both. ^B The one who is now man was indivisible, simple both in nature and in hypostasis, as he was only God, naked of body and of those things that accompany body, even if now, by the assumption of flesh possessing a rational soul, he has become composite in hypostasis—a thing which he was not—while remaining in his nature simple, in order to save you, O man. For he had only this as the cause of his fleshly birth: the salvation of the nature, which, having entered into it just as one enters a kind of density, he, through the intervening mind, communed with the passible in flesh, becoming a man, the lower God, having become everything for the sake of all that we are, except for sin: body, soul, mind—those things through which sin had permeated—a common something from these, man, God visible through that which is conceived.

The Word himself, therefore, without change, essentially emptied himself into the passibility that belongs to our nature, and through his incarnation truly coming under natural perception, began to be called visible God and lower God, making his own immense power manifest through flesh that is by nature passible. Since the flesh was manifestly leavened together with God and became one, the superior part prevailing, the Word who assumed it properly deified it through hypostatic identity. But he became one, and not one thing, the master said, wishing to show that even in the identity of the one hypostasis, the natural diversity of the united things is preserved without confusion; for the one is declarative of hypostasis, while the other is declarative of nature.

For the phrase: "So that I also might become as much God as he is [107 b] man," is not mine to say, who am stained with sins and am carried toward that life which is truly life with no appetite at all. It is rather yours, I say, yours who have recovered such perfection of nature that the grace of God alone is seen in you, and who through its efficacy seem capable of becoming as resplendent as God, through his incarnation, has partaken of our weakness, being measured in turn, as he himself knows, against his own emptying—the deification of those saved by grace, becoming entirely god-like and entirely capable of receiving God, and in him alone. For this is the perfection toward which those who have believed the promise hasten, that they shall truly be this.

From the same, from the second oration on the Son, on the passage: "As the Word"

(108 a) For in as much as the Word is God by nature, he is said to be entirely free from obedience and disobedience, because he is by nature the Giver of every commandment as Lord, the keeping of which is obedience, and the transgression of which is disobedience. For among those things which move by nature, the law according to the commandment and its fulfillment or transgression exist, but not in him whose nature and essence is rest itself. ^C

As the form of a servant, that is, having become man by nature, he descended to his fellow-servants and to servants, fashioned in a nature not his own, at once both in essence and by assuming the passibility of our own nature. For the penalty of the one who sinned is foreign to him who is by nature sinless, which is the passibility that—by reason of the transgression—was condemned in the entire nature.

If, however, having emptied himself in the form of a servant, that is, having become man, and having descended, he is fashioned in a nature not his own—that is, he becomes man by nature passible through his emptying—then this emptying is perceived in him as being at once good and philanthropic, and this descent is seen as proving that he is not only truly man, but also a man who is by nature truly passible. Therefore the teacher says: "Totum me

in seipso ferens una cum meis," ^A that is, bearing the whole human nature through the hypostatic union, together with its inseparable affections. Having thus accomplished these things, and having consumed that in us which was worse—through which even our nature admitted passibility (this, to speak more plainly, was the law of sin and transgression, which takes its strength from the perverse inclination of our will, and which of its own accord pours over the passible nature affections sometimes remiss and sometimes vehement)—he not only saved those held under sin, ^B but also made them partakers of divine virtue, himself paying the price for us. For through the constancy of the will regarding that which is truly good, both stability of soul and immortality of body are born in all those who labor not to have cultivated this grace feignedly. For this is what the most holy teacher intended when he said: "That he might consume and finish the worse in himself, just as fire does wax, or the sun's ray the mist of the earth, and I, through such a union, might become a partaker of his goods," that is, being cleansed by grace from the passions, I might be made like him.

There is, furthermore, another exposition of these words. He assumed an alien form, which I learned from a certain holy man, most wise in both words and deeds. ^C When I questioned him, he replied that obedience, and likewise subjection, are by nature foreign to the Word of God; yet he, for our sake who had transgressed the commandment, performed these, and saved our entire race, transferring to himself whatever was ours. For this reason, he honors obedience in fact, having become a new Adam in place of the old man by nature; and he attempts to taste of this through suffering, having been brought for our sake, voluntarily, through the same passions. For what else does the truly great teacher instruct, saying: "He was wearied, he was affected by hunger, he was exhausted by thirst, he feared death, he shed tears"? These were all truly of the body, and at the same time a clear demonstration of [his] affect, which is in no way inert, and also a sign of his condescension toward his fellow-servants and slaves. ^D For while being and remaining Lord by nature, he became a servant for me, who was a servant by nature, that he might make me lord of him who through deceit tyrannically lorded it over me. For this reason, he administered the servile condition—he, the Lord—that is, he exalted the flesh [as] God; and thus he demonstrated in the flesh also a power that is impassible and truly sovereign, which through passion would abolish all corruption and through death produce immortal life. Again, as a servant of the Lord, he administered these parts, bringing God down into the flesh [and] declaring the ineffable humiliation through which he deified our entire race in the passible flesh, which by corruption

^A had degenerated completely into earthly filth. For by this communication of properties he necessarily possessed the natures of which he himself was the hypostasis, and the essential operations and movements of those same natures, of which he himself, without confusion, was the union—and indeed such a union that those things existing within him according to their natures suffered no division in that hypostasis. Certainly, he operated in a way congruent to himself; his every action was unitary and uniform. In every work performed by him, the operation of his own flesh was manifested simultaneously with the power of the divinity. For he was one, and nothing could be more one than he, nor more unitive and conservative of the things that pertained to him; therefore, he who suffered was truly God, and he who performed miracles was no less truly the same man, since in him the natures were truly united through an ineffable hypostatic union. ^B By these things, I say, he aptly and congruently preserved them in their operation, remaining himself meanwhile without confusion. For his nature was both impassible and passible, immortal and mortal, visible and intelligible—in nature God, and by nature the same man.

In this way, to speak as I understand it, the Lord honors obedience and undergoes the experience of it through the evils he endured, not only so that he might save us by cleansing the whole of our nature from vice, but also so that he might test our obedience and understand all our affairs by experiencing them—he who otherwise encompasses all knowledge by his nature. Thus, surely, he would discern how much it was just to demand of us, and how much to concede, for perfect obedience; for through this he is accustomed to bring to his Father those who seemed worthy of salvation. How great, how truly ^C awesome is the mystery of our salvation! As much is demanded of us as was established by him in our own nature. Unless perhaps the inclination of the will, prone to sin, abuses the weakness of our nature as an occasion for evil. The great teacher is manifest in this opinion, and he confirms it in what follows. For when he says: "If the Light was pursued on account of the problem, shining in the darkness—in this life—by the other darkness,"—I mean the wicked one and the tempter—"how much more so the darkness, as it is weaker? And what is to be wondered at, if, while he escaped the enemy's snares entirely, we are to some extent apprehended? For it is a greater thing for him to have been pursued, than it is for us to have been apprehended, among those who ponder these things with right reason."

On the Epistle of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, Bishop of Athens, to the Monk Gaius

"How," you ask, "is Jesus, who is above all, constituted essentially in the same order as other men? For he is not spoken of here as the cause of men, but as he who is himself in his whole essence truly a man."

Since, according to the simple understanding of Holy Scripture, God is also designated by the names of the things derived from him, conceiving, perhaps, that even after the incarnation he...

is again called man in this way alone, the great Dionysius corrects Caius the monk with these words, teaching that the God of all is not simply called man, having become incarnate, but as being himself ^A in his whole essence truly man. And the sole and true proof of this is the power constitutive of his nature, which one would not err to call the natural energy, properly and primarily characteristic of it, as it is a movement existing as a form-giving principle, the most generic of all the natural and comprehensive properties pertaining to it, without which there is only that which is not; for as that which is in no way existent, according to this great teacher, it possesses neither movement nor existence. Very clearly, then, he teaches that the God who became incarnate denied nothing at all of what is ours, except sin, since that did not belong to the nature, explicitly declaring him to be not simply man, but himself truly man according to his whole essence. ^B And that he is strictly such, he declares throughout what follows and throughout the appellation of him who was humanly brought into existence, saying: "We, however, do not define Jesus by man." Since we do not dogmatize that he is a mere man, dividing the union which surpasses understanding. For we say the name "man" essentially in regard to him who by nature is God, who truly became substantial as we are, and not as if he is only the cause of men. For he is not man only, because he is also God ^C the same; nor is he only supersubstantial, because he is also man the same, if it be that he is not a mere man nor is he a naked God, but he is truly man, he who is distinguished by his love for mankind. For by an infinite love for men he became that very thing which he truly was by nature the object of desire, having suffered nothing towards his own essence by the ineffable emptying, nor having exchanged or diminished anything of the human nature by the ineffable assumption, of which the Word is properly its constitutive principle. "Above men," because he was born divinely without a man; "and according to men," because he was born humanly ^D by the law of gestation. "The supersubstantial One who was made substantial from the substance of men": for he did not imagine for us in himself a mere forming of flesh in the shape of a body, according to the ravings of the Manichaeans, nor did he bring down with him from heaven a flesh con-substantialized to himself, according to the fables of Apollinarius, but having become himself in his whole essence truly man, by the assumption clearly of flesh endowed with a soul and mind, united to himself by hypostasis.

"Yet he is nevertheless overflowing with supersubstantiality, inasmuch as he is always above substance." For he was not subjected to nature when he became man, but, on the contrary, he rather...

made nature subject to himself, producing in it a different mystery, while he himself remained altogether incomprehensible, and showed his own incarnation—which attained a birth above all substance—to be a mystery even more incomprehensible than any other; for by it he became accessible to understanding ^A only to the extent that, through it, he was known to be all the more incomprehensible. "For he remains hidden even after his manifestation," as that teacher says, "or, to speak more divinely, he remains hidden even in the manifestation. For this mystery of Jesus is hidden, and is not expressed by any word or by the intellect; nay, even while it is being proclaimed, it remains a secret, and while it is being understood, it remains unknown." What could be more demonstrative of the divine supersubstantiality than this, which by its manifestation hides what is secret, by speech declares its own ineffability, by the mind proves itself to be most eminent in its unknowability, and, to say the greater thing, makes the supersubstantial to be substantial? ^B Truly, in the overflowing abundance of this, even when he had truly come into substance, he was substantiated above substance, for he changed the laws of generation according to nature, and without the seed of a man he truly became man in form. And the Virgin declares him, bearing the supersubstantial Word in a way above nature, without a man, from her own virginal blood, formed in man’s likeness by a law foreign to nature. And he performed the things of man in a way above man, having, as it were, transformed the nature of the elements in his footsteps. And the water clearly shows this: unstable, yet supporting the weight of feet composed of material and earthy bulk, and not giving way, but by a supernatural power ^C standing firm against dissolution; since he walked indeed with dry feet—possessing a bodily mass and the weight of matter—traversing the liquid and unstable substance, treading upon the sea as if it were solid ground, and by the power of his own divinity inseparably manifesting, through that passage, the operation of his own flesh according to nature. For the movement of that passage was by nature proper to that flesh, but in no way proper to the infinite and supersubstantial divinity united to it according to hypostasis. For the superessential Word, once he had assumed the essence of man, had together with it the movement which is fully proper to man, which generally characterizes his essence, and is naturally specified in all those things in which he operated as man; for since he truly became man, breathing, speaking, walking, moving his hands, ^D properly using his senses for the perception of sensible things, hungering, thirsting, eating, sleeping, drinking, weeping, sorrowing—while yet being independent in his power, and doing all these other things by which, as a soul naturally moves its own connatural body, he moved the nature he had assumed as his own—he truly became and is called man, or, to speak more precisely, he himself, without change, having truly and unimaginably become that which is nature, fulfilled the economy for our sake. He did not, therefore, abolish the constitution of the assumed essence,

just as the master did not abolish the essence itself when he said: “He was subsisted above essence, and He worked above man’s condition those things which belong to man;” ^A but he showed in both the

novelty of the modes

This synod, having performed the great miracle of the supernatural physiology of Jesus, showed the difference of the energies and the union in one and the same: the one perceived indivisibly in the natural definition ^C of those united, the other recognized unconfusedly in the singular mode of those things coming into being. For what, or who, or where, or how, will a nature be that is deprived of its constitutive power? For that which has absolutely no power neither is, nor is it anything, nor is there any placing of it at all, says this great teacher. But if there is no account for these things, it must be piously confessed that the natures of Christ, of which He Himself was the subsistence, are to be confessed, as also His natural energies, of which He Himself was the true union, according to both natures; even if He was working in a manner proper to Himself, singularly, or rather, uniformly, and by all things inseparably manifesting the energy of His own flesh by the divine power.

(112 b) For how will the same one be by nature God, and again by nature man, not having without fail that which is by nature adapted ^D to both? And what, or who, will he be known to be, not being certified by those things which He worked, naturally being what He is without change? And how will He be certified, while remaining unmoved and inactive regarding the things from which, in which, and what He is? He was therefore subsisted above essence, creating an origin of generation and a birth different to nature, having been conceived by the sowing of the divine flesh, but born; and having become the seal of virginity upon the one who bore Him, He showed the contradiction of things inexpressible upon her to be true together. For the same one is both virgin and mother, innovating nature by the meeting of opposites…

for virginity and birth are opposites, and in nature no concurrence of these can be understood. Wherefore also the Theotokos was truly a Virgin; in a supernatural way she conceived and gave birth to the superessential Word according to the manner of seed: for she who gave birth is without doubt the mother of Him who was sown and conceived in her.

^B And He performed human operations above the condition of a human, through the most exact union, without any conversion, showing the human operation by divine power; since even the human nature, being inconfusibly united to the divine nature, has entirely interpenetrated it, possessing nothing loose or divided from the deity which was united to it according to hypostasis. For the superessential Word, having truly become man for our sake, taking on our substance, connected the things that are affirmed of nature with the negation that exists by the pre-eminence of the same natural powers, and He became man, having a mode of being that transcended nature, connected with the mode of being according to nature, in order that He might both confirm nature by the novelty of these modes, not admitting alteration according to the principle of essence, and show the more than infinite power as recognizable even in the genesis of opposites. Indeed, He performed the works of the passions of nature by the authority of the will, ^C but not as they are for us, the results of natural necessity; on the contrary, He went through the passibility that is ours by nature—which in us has the opposite state—showing in Himself that which is naturally movable by will to be moved by the authority of the will. This the Master clarifies for the following, saying: "Why should anyone go through the remaining things, which are very many, by which he who beholds in a divine manner will understand, beyond the intellect, even those things which are affirmed concerning the humanity of Jesus, as having the power of an excellent negation?" For the superessential Word, having assumed all things that pertain to nature together with nature in that ineffable conception, had nothing human affirmed of Himself by natural reason which was not also divine, and ^D able to be denied in a way above nature. The knowledge of all these things, as being above the intellect, was also above demonstration, and is perceivable only by the faith of those who genuinely venerate the mystery of Christ. Concerning this, as if giving a summary account, he says: "For indeed, to speak briefly, he was not even a man," because He was naturally exempt from the necessity belonging to nature, not being subjected to the law of generation as we are. Not as if He were not man, in that He was truly man in His whole essence, according to nature enduring the natural things that are ours, but because He was from men; since He was consubstantial with us, being man by nature as we are, yet "beyond men," and new.

^A And having truly become man beyond man, ^A he possessed the modes surpassing nature and the reasons according to nature linked together without damage to each other—the concurrence of which was impossible, but He, to whom nothing is impossible, becoming a true union, in no way at all, ^B in terms of the hypostasis of either one, declined from the other in operation, but rather confirmed [one] through the other; since He is truly both, and as God He moves His own humanity, while as man He declares His own divinity. In the divine nature, if one may speak so, He suffered, for He suffered voluntarily, and he was not merely a man; but in the human nature He performed miracles, for He was in the flesh, and God did not exist naked. Thus indeed the passions were wondrous, being renewed by the natural divine power of Him who suffers, and the miracles were passible, being fulfilled by the natural passible power of the flesh of the One who works these miracles. Knowing this, the teacher says: "And furthermore, not as God doing divine things"—since He was not merely God-wise separated from the flesh, for He is not only superessential—"nor [doing] human things as man," [114 a] because He was not merely flesh-wise separated from the divinity, for He is not only man, "but the God who became man has lived among us a certain new 'theandric' operation." For indeed, by the assumption of a soul-endowed flesh having truly become man, the One who is surpassingly philanthropic, through an ineffable union ^C joined the divine operation with the human by the coalescence of the flesh, and has fulfilled for us the dispensation, that is, both as God and as man, he administered divine and human things, or, to speak more clearly, His divine polity exhibited at once both divine and human operations.

Since, then, the wise teacher denied that the divine and Human [operations] were divided from one another, when he affirmed the union, he did not ignore that the united things also differ among themselves; for union, by removing division, does not hinder difference. But if the mode of union preserves the reason of the difference, surely this expression of the holy man will be a periphrasis, through which he shows, with well-fitting speech, a double operation in Christ, who possesses two natures. Since by no means, whether you look at the nature or the quality ^D of those things which are united, is the essential reason of the united things impaired. Nor, as some wish, does he affirm a certain middle by denying the extremes; for there is no middle in Christ that can be affirmed by the negation of the extremes. "He called it new," that is, he characterizes it as a new mystery, the reason of which is the ineffable mode of natural conjunction. For who

^A has known how God is incarnate, and yet remains God? How, while remaining God true, he is man true; showing himself truly to be both by natural existence, and through each the other, and being turned into neither? This only faith grasps, honoring with silence the Word, for whose nature no account among created things is found that corresponds to it. "Theandric," he added, not because he understands either a simple operation, or one factually composite, or one existing merely of naked deity by nature, or of bare humanity alone, or belonging to a composite nature which would be a borderland between two extremes; but one which would most naturally befit God made man, that is, who has perfectly become man. Again, he did not say "one" as if it were the case that a "new" ^B operation could not be understood except through "one," as it pleases some; for the "newness" pertains to quality, not quantity, since it necessarily introduces such a nature; for every definition of nature is sought from the account of its essential operation, which not even he who indulges in the fables of tragelaphs would say is double. But if this is granted, how will one in whom it is naturally inherent to have one operation, and that a natural one, perform by the same means both the miracles and the passions, which by the account of nature differ from one another, without a privation resulting from the generation of the habit? For nothing that exists is naturally capable of performing opposites by one and the same operation, while being held together by the limit and account of nature. For this reason, it is not lawful to speak of one operation simply and naturally in Christ regarding his divinity and his flesh, unless divinity and flesh were the same in natural quality. For in this way we would also affirm one nature, and the Trinity would become a Quaternity. For the Son was the same as the Father and the Spirit through the unity of essence, but he was not the same as the flesh through the union, even if he made it life-giving when he united it to himself; for it still had in it the mortal lot by nature. ^C For if he were existing in a mutable nature, and had changed the essence of the flesh into that which it was not, he would thus have made the union the same as the nature. But let us understand the theandric operation as it has been interpreted: which he renewed for us, not by living the nature for himself, but by living it for things above nature. For "polity" (the life-style) is a life conducted according to the law of nature. But the Lord, being double in nature, rightfully appeared having a life appropriate to it, harmonized without confusion according to both divine and human law; and it was a new life, not only as strange and paradoxical to those who were then on earth and as being yet unknown to the nature of things, but also because it was a character of a new operation of Him who lived in a new manner. Perhaps he who first devised a fitting appellation ^D for this mystery called it "theandric," in order to show the mode of the exchange according to the ineffable union, how those things that naturally pertain to each part of Christ have been made to belong to the other, without the one part of each towards the other according to the natural

^A ratio, permutation, or confusion. For just as in an ignited sword the power of cutting is burning, and the power of burning is cutting (for the fire is united as to the iron), so also the power of burning of the fire is united to the cutting power of the iron, and the iron becomes burning by the union with the fire, and the fire becomes cutting by the union with the iron—yet neither in any way undergoes movement by the opposition according to union towards the other, but each has remained, even in the quality of the composition according to union, inalienable from its own natural properties. So also in the mystery of the divine incarnation, the divinity and humanity are united hypostatically, with neither of the natures departing from its own energy because of the union, nor possessing it as something unconnected after the union, and distinct from that which is compounded and co-exists ^B with it. For the incarnate Word, by the entire active power of His own divinity, having fully taken into an indissoluble union the suffering power of His own humanity, being God, performed miracles humanly, which were completed through flesh that is naturally susceptible to suffering; and being God, He humanly went through the sufferings of nature, which were performed by divine authority; but both, rather, in a theandric way, as He was God and man at once. In the one, He gave us to ourselves, showing us to be what we have become, and in the other, He gives us to Himself, that we might become what He has demonstrated, and through both, He proves the truth of those things from which, in which, and as which He existed, as He alone is true and faithful, and as He desires that which He is to be confessed by us. Having Him, therefore, most holy ones, both in word and deed, since you possess Him formed within yourselves, I pray you, imitate ^C His long-suffering; accept this writing, so that I may experience you to be mild judges of what I have brought forward. May your equity cover the errors of your servant, who seeks no other fruit of his obedience. Be for me mediators of reconciliation with Christ, and create that peace which surpasses all understanding, of which the Savior Himself is the Prince, who alone frees those who fear Him from the swell of the passions through practical habits, and who, as the Father of the age to come, generates through love and knowledge in the Spirit those who will fill the upper world. To Him be glory, majesty, ^D and power, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, to the ages. Amen.

TO THE MOST GLORIOUS AND PIOUS KING CHARLES, BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE AND BY THE ASSISTANCE OF GRACE, JOHN, THE LOWLIEST OF YOUR SERVANTS, WISHES ETERNAL SALVATION IN CHRIST.

^A This work of Maximus, monk and abbot, which, at the request of the most holy and blessed Archbishop of Cyzicus, John, he composed as explanations of the "Ambiguorum," that is, of the difficult meanings in the homilies of the most blessed Gregory the Theologian, I have edited from Greek into Latin at your command. You have laid upon your servant—a man very weak in Latin, and far more so in Greek—a labor that is throughout most difficult. Moreover, you also commanded me to hasten, as if I were a scholar of both tongues, and to complete it quickly. But according to the strength of my meager talent, I have both hastened and, with divine grace leading and granting, have brought it to completion. Perhaps, defended by some sort of apology, I would not have entered into such dense darkness, had I not seen that the aforementioned most blessed Maximus, in the process of his work, very often introduced the most obscure pronouncements of the most holy theologian Dionysius the Areopagite, whose symbolic and theological meanings I recently translated, likewise at your command, and had I not seen how he elucidated them in a wonderful way, to such an extent that I in no way doubted that the divine clemency, which illuminates the hidden things of darkness, arranged this by His ineffable providence, so that He might reveal what was most obscure to us in the aforementioned books of the blessed Dionysius, or what seemed to escape our senses, with the most wise Maximius ^B explaining it most clearly. For example, to say a few things out of many, how the cause of all things, which is God, is one, simple, and manifold; what the procession is, that is, the multiplication of divine goodness through all things that exist, from the highest down to the lowest, descending through general essence first, then through the most general genera, then through the more general genera, and from there through the more specific species down to the most specific species through differences and properties. And again, of the same—that is, naturally, of the divine goodness—what the reversion is, that is, the gathering, through the same steps from the infinite and varied multiplication of the things that exist up to the most simple unity of all, which is in God and is God, so that God is all things and all things are God. And how the aforementioned procession of the divine into all things is called *analytike*, that is, resolution, while the reversion is *theosis*, that is, deification. And for what reason those things which are in the greatest multiplication are lowest in virtue, while those which are in the least multiplication are greatest in virtue. What should I say of the *kataphatic* and *apophatic* theology, in which the most profound and most divine and wonderful disputation of the aforementioned blessed Dionysius the Areopagite is most of all contained? How clearly and beautifully he reveals how, although they seem opposite and indeed contradictory to one another, they yet arrive at one consensus, so that while one denies and the other affirms, each is contained in the other; thus it happens that *kataphatic* does not affirm what *apophatic* denies, nor does *apophatic* deny what *kataphatic* affirms. And he declares by most manifest examples that these two greatest parts of theology exist not only in God, but also in every creature; for through them the orders of the celestial essences are both distinguished and ordained. And for what reason God is said to move and be moved, while He is immutable; and that God does not perceive sensible things through sense, nor intelligible things through the intellect, nor sensible things through the intellect, nor intelligible things through sense, but contemplates all things in His eternal reasons. He also wonders at the unity of the three divine substances, and about the three substances of the divine unity as if by a most mystical set of six, and many other things which the studious reader of the present work will find. ^C Therefore, most pious of kings, do not refuse to allow the work, which you commanded be done for the common illumination of the catholic faith, to be strengthened by the judgment of your most high authority, and to be received among similar instruments of sound doctrine, since you do not doubt that it is derived from the most illustrious fountains of the Greeks; in which, if anything is found of doctrine still unknown to us, it is to be attributed to the authors themselves, because no one ought rightly to attribute anything else to me in this work, except only that I have simply translated it.

FROM THE SAME.

^D

To John, Archbishop of Cyzicus, Maximus, a humble monk, wishes health in the Lord.

They are praised, and perhaps justly so, by all who are the more eager lovers of good things because of their desire for learning, and who are more diligent seekers of the knowledge which is in them, approaching better and better teachers, because by receiving instruction reverently through the interrogation of the wise, they free themselves from ignorance and inexperience and the shame of them.

but what speech could worthily praise you? Or what man, even if he were to attempt an experiment of diligence, will be found capable of grasping the magnitude of your virtue? For since you are proven shepherds of rational sheep, and know how to lead and bring them to the upper fold by the voices of a spiritual pipe, having beforehand acquired a unique habit of the mystical knowledge of divine things—a habit impossible for many—by which you worthily and intelligently steer the rudders of the Church of Christ as if it were a ship, with the burden of faith and the beauty of life according to God, toward the harbor of the divine will, untouched by any of the temptations of the sea of life.

Concerning the things known to you, of which God has established you as masters, not only for those who are wiser—if any among you is superior in knowledge—but [also for those] whom you do not deem unworthy to question, even those who are worthy of nothing and entirely inexperienced in all doctrine, with faith that they may find something noble even among the unclean, as is your custom. Therefore, I also, having received your venerable letter, which orders me to write to you concerning each of the points that were a source of difficulty for you in the sermons of the holy theologian Gregory, about which I was studious when I was with those who were convenient, I commend as having then been given the reasoned explanation of the scripture. Indeed, I admired you for the worth of your virtue, and I praised in it your clear and lofty hospitality, which is pleasing to Christ; but even more, I praised the Lord, who is glorified in every way through you and in you, who made you worthy for this, and who granted to you virtue, He who openly manifests the beauty of truth to His servants through your works, even down to me, who am small, worthy of nothing, untaught, and completely stripped of all virtue and knowledge. Considering myself humbled by this, I compelled myself to accept your precept according to my ability, so that I might not be thought rash by the many in composing a discourse for your sake; but also, so that you might grant as usual your earnest prayers to one expecting to receive the pleasing and lovely reward of obedience, so that Christ the Lord, who is the ready help of those who fear Him, may come as my helper in speech; or rather, that the Word may grant the word, by speaking, as befits piety, everything. ^C But I ask you, as you entreat [Him], not to seek from me an ornate style, for I do not possess words that adorn the hearing, and I do not know how to construct periods with curious sounds. For while I am ignorant of such doctrines, and do not comprehend the magnitude of the care that is in them, I deem it most beloved and desirable if I might consider, even through a confused explanation, ^D the sense of this great and holy teacher, though I do not honor the exposition with multiplied verses. For the Theologian

^A is, as you know, a man of few words but great depth of mind, and he forces one who wishes to unfold his meaning—even if he be most eloquent and philosophical—to move through many things, and especially so for me, a common man. If, however, the God-beloved zeal that habitually moves you toward the concise and at once eloquent, urges you to transport what is written—or even to direct the whole mind toward the higher—you shall receive a complete reward, namely the prayers of that God-bearer to the Lord of all, inasmuch as you have not allowed [117b] his divine and supernatural insights to be dragged along by rejected and low-lying impositions. Following your letter, I have made inquiry into every chapter and committed it to writing, praying that you may become kind and humane judges of what is said.

From the sermon on love for the poor, on the passage: "I spare as a co-worker, and I do not have how I might flee the onset, or how I might not fall from God, weighed down by the fetters dragging or holding me to the ground."

"Being dragged down" and "being held" are not understood as the same thing by this blessed man. Do not think so, most approved one, if you have taken pains to understand anything of his greatness of mind; for he would appear superfluous in words and lacking an intellect that rises above his discourse, unless in almost every syllable he put forth a fitting perception, leading the followers to the most beautiful and useful things in every way, so that no room for dispute is left. But things are not so; not at all! Rather, he establishes ^C the word with a wise mind, and sets a higher mind upon the lofty word, so that the lofty may announce to the lofty, and the magnitude of truth, which is for most or even all inaccessible, may be somewhat shown by both. But in order that the riddle of what is said may be clear to us, let us consider the very words of the blessed man as they are. "I spare," he says, "as a co-worker, and I do not have how I might flee the onset, or how I might not fall from God, weighed down by the fetters, dragging or holding me to the ground." By saying these things, he is not speaking only of himself, but through himself he discourses for the commonality [118a] of humanity, knowing that everyone who loves salvation attends entirely either to action or to contemplation. For without virtue and knowledge, no one has ever been able to attain salvation by any means. "If, therefore," he says, "I have been established as one of those who by contemplation attend to God and enjoy the blessed beauty, having peace and sanctification in everything, as I...

apply myself inseparably to God through a knowledge of likeness, ^A properly evaluating the irrational powers of the soul and, by means of reason, bringing them to the mind and making them familiar—I mean irascibility and desire—transforming the one into love and the other into joy; since it is characteristic of joy to exult divinely and to rejoice, just as John, the great precursor and herald of the truth, exulted from the womb, or as King David did when he caused the Ark of Israel to rest. For in the womb (even if the argument is difficult and inaccessible to the many, it is nonetheless true) both we and God the Word, who is the Maker and Lord of the universe, exist; and he, in the present state of life, is secretly—as if in a womb—hardly appearing to this sensible world, and this for those who are in the Spirit according to John. But men, as if out of the womb of material circumstance, even if they occasionally see the Word hidden within existing things—and this, if they are boasting in the graces of John. For indeed, compared to the ineffable glory and splendor of the age to come, and the peculiar nature of the life that is in it, the present life, in the judgment of one who rejoices, is no different from a womb covered in darkness, in which, for our sake, God—who is the Word perfect and more than perfect—in his mercy became an infant, we being infants in our understanding. If, therefore, as has been said, I am such a person, and have attained to the divine summit possible for men in this present, transitory life, but I neglect the God-like habit, ^B willingly inclining myself toward the desire for the body, I am dragged down, weighed down by 'boys'—that is, by attachments—and I have fallen from God, inasmuch as I have attributed the thought and search concerning the kingdom of heaven alone to that to which it was not lawful—I mean to the earthly life—and by bestowing it upon the senses rather than bearing my mind toward God, I dishonor it. But if I am still a warrior by the active life against the armed passions, not yet having purely escaped the snares of the enemies who wish to capture me through them, and I indiscriminately love the body, I am held fast by it, obviously since I presume to be separated from virtue by the habit directed toward it. ^C Therefore, the contemplative man is dragged down, already becoming intemperate through the habit directed toward the body, neglecting divine contemplations; and the active man is held fast, he who struggles with the body, being given over to the struggle with it, and while laboring for the sake of virtue, which is the freedom of the soul, he chooses to be a slave to the passions.

From the same discourse, on the passage, "What is the wisdom concerning me, and what is this great mystery?"

and is the associated weakness a discipline of our dignity? ^A

Some, encountering these words—not, so it seems, expecting any reward for the labor of investigating the truth—flee toward what is easy and already has many starting points from the doctrines of the Greeks. They claim that there once existed, as it appeared to them, a unity of rational beings, through which we are kin to God and had our dwelling and gathering in Him. Furthermore, they claim that the movement which occurred, from which the rational beings were dispersed in various ways for the generation of this bodily world, caused God, while foreknowing the grace that was prepared, to bind them to bodies for the punishment of what had been previously committed, and they think the master intimates this through these words. ^B But they are ignorant of the fact that they are positing impossibilities and aiming at absurdity, as the true argument, proceeding forward, will prove with probability. For if the divine is immutable, as the fullness of all things, and everything that receives its being from non-being is moved, as being borne toward some cause, and since nothing that is in motion has yet come to a halt—as the power of movement according to impulse has not yet found rest in the ultimate object of desire (for nothing is naturally inclined to come to a halt except that which is demonstrated to be the object of desire), then nothing in motion has come to a halt, as it has not yet attained the ultimate object of desire; since not even that, not yet having appeared, has checked the movement of those being borne around it. ^C If they decree that this once happened by command, and that the rational beings were moved out of their setting and station in the ultimate and only object of desire and received this dispersion—so as not to be long-winded, what is the proof? They will reasonably and of necessity posit that the rational beings will have these same falls infinitely upon one another. For there will be no argument to forbid him who possesses the experience of once being able to despise [the good] to be able to do so forever. And to be thus borne about, the rational beings having no basis or expectation of a firm stability in the good—what could be more miserable? ^D If they should say that they have the power but not the will, because of the experience they have had of the opposite, then the good will be for them of necessity something to be cherished, not for its own sake as something good, but because of the opposite, as it is not loved by nature or properly. For everything that is not good and desirable for its own sake, and does not attract all movement to itself, is not properly good. And for this reason, it would not reasonably be able to hold back the desire of those who take pleasure in it, and they might even admit that it is because of evil.

Those who ^A cultivate this frame of mind, having been taught by it what is fitting, and having learned how to establish themselves firmly in the good—they would necessarily call it "generation," if they have understood themselves to follow a path, and one more useful than that of the nature itself, being as it is, according to them, instructive of what is beneficial and generative of the most precious of all possessions, I mean love, by which it is natural for all things that come from God to be gathered back into God, permanently and unchangeably.

And again, of those things which are made by God, both the intelligible and the sensible, generation is understood before motion. For it is not possible for motion to exist before generation. For the motion of things that are made is itself either intelligible, in the case of intelligible things, or sensible, in the case of sensible things. For ^B nothing of what is made is, by the same token, absolutely motionless—not even those things that are inanimate and sensible, as it seemed to the more studious observers of existing things. For they said that all things are moved, either in a straight line, or in a circle, or obliquely. For every motion is contained within a simple or composite mode. If, therefore, generation is understood before the motion of the things whose motion it is, then the motion of those things whose generation it is is certainly contemplated as being a secondary thought, coming after it.

This motion they call a natural faculty, hastening toward its own end, which those who have introduced us to the sacred science of divine mysteries have sacredly— or a passion, that is, motion coming from one thing to another, whose end is impassibility, or an active operation, whose end is perfection through itself. But no created thing is its own end, since it is not the cause of itself; otherwise it would be unbegotten and without beginning and immutable, and would deservedly be in no way inclined to be moved; for it would transcend the nature of things that exist, being for the sake of nothing, if the definition of it is true, even if ^C he who speaks it is alien: "The end is that for the sake of which all things exist, but it itself is for the sake of nothing." Nor is it "perfect through itself," since it is also inactive, as it is full, and likewise possesses its being from nowhere. For that which is perfect through itself is somehow also without cause. Nor is it "impassible," since it is also alone and infinite and uncircumscribed. For it is not in the nature of that which is impassible to suffer at all, in that it neither loves another nor is moved toward [120 b] anything else by desire.

Therefore, none of the generated things has come to a stop in its motion, as if it had not yet grasped the first and only Cause, from which existence belongs to those that have it, or as if it had not yet been placed within the final Object of desire, so that, from a previously existing unity, the dispersion of rational things might not be thought to have followed by introducing for itself the generation of bodies. And the holy Moses and David and Paul bear witness, as does the Master of these, Christ—one of them, by narrating that the progenitor tasted of the tree of life, and elsewhere by saying, "For you have not yet come to the rest and to the inheritance which the Lord our God gives unto you." And He who...

^A says to the Philippians, "If by any means I may attain unto the resurrection of the dead, not that I have already received or am already perfected, but I press on if so be that I may lay hold of that for which I was also laid hold of by Jesus Christ." And to the Hebrews: "For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his works, as God did from his own." And again in the same Epistle, he confirms that no one has yet received the promises. And He who says, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

Therefore, as yet in no way has any of the things that have been generated established its natural power moved towards the end pertaining to it, nor has it ceased from its operation by bringing it to rest at the end pertaining to it, nor has it gathered the fruit according to the movement of passion—I mean, impassibility and immobility. For it belongs to God alone to be the end, and the perfect, and the impassible, seeing that He is immobile, full, and impassible; but for things generated, it is to be moved without beginning towards the end, and at some perfect end to cause the operation to cease, and to suffer, but not to *be* or to *become* according to essence, being without quality; for everything generated and created is clearly not without relation. One must listen to the nature of "passion" with good sense; for the passion indicated here is not that which results from change or corruption of power, but that which by nature co-exists with ^B beings. For all things that have come to be suffer being moved, as not being self-movement or self-power.

If, therefore, rational beings are generated and are altogether moved, as from a principle according to nature for their *being*, they are also moved toward an end according to choice for their *well-being*. For the end of the movement of things moved is the "ever-well-being," just as the beginning is the "being" itself, which is God, who is both the giver of being and the bestower of well-being, as both beginning and end; for from Him is both our being moved simply, as from a beginning, and the *how* of our being moved towards Him as an end. ^C If, therefore, that which is rational is moved rationally in a manner analogous to itself, it also understands; and if it understands, it essentially loves that which is understood; and if it loves, it also suffers a passion—a stretching towards it as the one who is beloved. And if it suffers passion, it is evident that it also hastens; and if it hastens, it certainly intensifies the vehemence of the movement; and if it intensifies the movement vehemently, it does not stop until it becomes whole in the whole beloved, and is encompassed ^D by the whole, voluntarily accepting in its entirety, according to the saving choice, the circumscription, so that it might be made whole by the whole, by the One who circumscribes, so that it might no longer wish at all to be from itself.

being able to know itself wholly as circumscribed, but rather from the One who circumscribes; just as air is wholly illuminated by light, and iron is wholly liquefied by fire, or anything else of such a nature. From these things, we receive by conjecture—not yet attained and incorrupt—the participation in the divine goodness that is promised to the worthy, only through a likeness; since the things that are to be hoped for are above all these things, being, as it is written, beyond vision, and hearing, and intellect.

And this perhaps is the subjection which the divine Apostle says the Son will subject to the Father, those who voluntarily accept being subjected, after which—or through which—the last enemy, death, is destroyed, as the power of corruption through which it made its entry into us (with Him who is powerful of Himself in us, helping according to us), when our self-determination—the power through which it had made its entry against us—is voluntarily and universally surrendered to God, and when He who reigns well, that is God, reigns, in that we cease from willing anything beyond what God wills. Just as the Savior Himself says elsewhere, forming within Himself what is ours toward the Father: "Nevertheless, not as I will, but as You [will]." And after Him, the wondrous Paul, as if denying himself and knowing no longer how to possess a life of his own: "I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me."

Do not let what is said trouble you. For I do not say that there is a taking away of one's own power, but rather a placing of it according to a fixed and immutable nature—that is, an intellectual transcendence—so that we might desire to receive our being and motion from the source where it exists for us, just like an image returning to its principal exemplar, and like a seal well-fitted to the impression of the archetype, having no longer either the power or the ability to be borne elsewhere; or, to speak more clearly and truly, not even the capacity to will, since it has laid hold of the divine operation, or rather, it has become God through deification, and finds more pleasure in the transcendence of those things that are naturally in it, and of those things that are and are understood, because of the grace of the Spirit which has conquered it, and has shown that it has only God as its operator, so that there is one and only one operation through all things, of God and of those worthy of God—or rather, of God alone, as He who wholly and beautifully encompasses all those who are worthy. For there is an absolute necessity for all self-determined movement according to desire to cease with respect to everything else, since the ultimate object of desire has appeared and is partaken of, and according to the power of the partakers, is—if I may say so—incomprehensibly appropriated; toward which every way of life of the noble mind hastens, and in which every desire finds rest, and beyond which it is in no way moved; for it neither possesses anything else, nor does all movement of the one who is earnest tend toward anything else, and having reached this, there is the rest of all contemplation, as this blessed one says.

For nothing will be manifested then outside of God, nor will anything appear to the imagination as standing over against God, so that it might entice the desire of anyone to incline toward it, because all things—both intelligible and sensible—will be embraced by Him according to His ineffable manifestation and presence. It is like the stellar lights in the day, and the stars themselves, which are hidden by the great and incomparable light of the sun, from which they have their light, and it is not even known that they exist, as far as the senses are concerned. ^A In God, however, there is something more, just as there is an infinite distance and difference between the uncreated and the created. For then, knowing the existence of things according to their essence, according to the "what," the "how," and the "in what" a thing is—as I suppose—we shall no longer be moved toward anything in our desire according to knowledge, since the knowledge of each of the things after God, and of each thing in itself, will have reached its end for us, and the infinite and divine and incomprehensible [source of] enjoyment will be underlying us alone and partaken of by us according to our capacity. And this is what is most profoundly philosophized according to this God-bearing teacher: that we shall one day know as we have been known, ^B when we shall commingle this God-like and divine mind and reason of ours with its own [principle], and the image shall ascend to the archetype, for which it now has the desire. Let these things be said concerning the fact that the acclaimed unity is not divided, and how the state of things to come will be, according to the manifestation from the concepts and reasonings of Scripture now accessible to us. But concerning how, while being a portion of God, we have flowed away from God, I shall now, with God as my guide, begin the discourse. For who, knowing by reason and wisdom that all things were brought by God from non-being into being, if he were to bring the contemplative faculty of the soul prudently ^C through the infinite difference and variety of the natural things that exist, and were to distinguish with discursive, investigative reason through the intellect the cause according to which they were created, would not know many causes [as only] one cause of all things that have been made, inseparably distinguishing the difference through their unconfused property toward one another and toward themselves; and again, [would not know] the one as many, through the relation of all things toward it, existing by itself inconfusedly, the one-essential and one-substantial God the Word of God and Father, ^D as the principle and cause of all things? In Him all things were created, those in the heavens and those upon the earth, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities.

^A For holding the causes of those things which have been made, pre-established before the ages, by a good will He established from non-being the visible and invisible creation according to them, having made and still making all things, both universal and particular, by reason and wisdom at the due time. For we believe that the cause of the creation of angels leads the way, as does the cause of each of those essences and powers which complete the world above us, and the cause of humans, and the cause of all things that have received their being from God—not to speak of them individually, since He Himself, while being by His own nature infinitely surpassing, ineffable, and unintelligible, and beyond all the distinction and discrimination of every creature and of that which exists by itself and is understood, ^B is well and beautifully [(c)] showing and multiplying Himself in all things which are from Him according to the analogy of each, and recapitulating all things in Himself, through whom those things which have been generated, both remaining and moved, participate in God, and have both being and permanence from Him. For all things participate in God proportionally—because they have been made by God—whether through intellect, or reason, or sense, or vital motion, or essential habit and opportunity, as seems right to the great and divine manifestor, Dionysius the Areopagite. Therefore, every one of the intelligible and rational angels and humans, through that cause by which it was created—which is in God and is toward God—is and is called a part of God, through its cause pre-existing in God, as has been said. ^C And so, if it were to move according to it, it would exist in God, in whom its essential reason pre-exists as principle and cause; and it would wish to take no desire for anything else before its own principle, nor would it flow back from God, but rather, through the intention toward Him, it would become God and be called a part of God by participating in God connaturalistically—as one who, according to nature, wisely and rationally, through its own beautiful motion, is about to receive its principle and cause, having thereafter no other place to move to, after its own principle and the rise and restitution to the reason by which it was created, or how to move, since its motion toward the divine purpose has taken the divine purpose as its end. ^D As also the holy Basil declares in his interpretation on the holy prophet Isaiah, saying thus: "But true Sabbaths are the rest stored up for the people of God, which, for the very reason that they are true, God accepts and manifests as the supreme Sabbaths of rest; he to whom the world is crucified, departing indeed from worldly things and occurring at the proper place of spiritual rest, in which, having arrived, he shall no longer be moved from his own place, while there is silence and peace around that state."

^A For God is the place of all those who are worthy of such blessedness, according to what is written: "Be to me a God, a protector, and a place of refuge to save me." ^B With Him the reasons (logoi) of all things are firmly established, in accordance with which He is said to know all things before their generation, as they exist in Him and with Him by the very truth of all things. And even if all these things—both those that are and those that are to be—were not brought into existence together with their own reasons (logoi), or with the fact of having been known by God, but each is created in its suitable time according to the wisdom of the Creator, as befits their own reasons, and receives its being in itself through operation—since He is always Creator by operation, while these are by potentiality but not yet by operation—because it is not possible for the infinite and the finite to be together, nor will any reason be shown to be able to demonstrate that essence and the superessential can be the same, and to bring into one the immeasurable with that which is in measure, and the unrelated with that which is in relation, and that which has no kind of category asserted of it with that which is constituted by all these things.

For all created things are, as to their essence and generation, completely affirmed by their own proper reasons (logoi) and those of the external things that encompass them. ^C When, therefore, the supreme and apophatic theology of the Word is removed—according to which He is neither spoken of, nor understood, nor is He anything at all of the things known, as being superessential, nor is He participated in by anything in any way—the many reasons (logoi) are the one Reason, and the One is the many. For regarding the good and beautiful processional flow from the One, which is productive and cohesive of existing things, the many are One; but regarding the return and the guiding referral and providence of the many toward the One, just as if toward an omnipotent principle or the center of the lines originating from Him, which has taken hold of the beginnings of all things and is as it were the gathering of all, the One is the many.

We are therefore, and are called, a part of God, because the reasons (logoi) of our being pre-exist in God. And we are said to have flowed down from above because we have not moved according to the reason (logos) that pre-exists in God, according to which we were created. ^D And it is easy for one who has been piously instructed in the reasons (logoi) of beings to discourse on this subject in another way as well. For if it is not doubted that the one Word of God exists as the essence of each virtue—for the Lord Himself, our Jesus Christ, is the essence of all the virtues, as it is written: "Who was made for us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption"—He surely possesses these things in Himself absolutely, by right, being wisdom, righteousness, and holiness by His own essence, and not as they are in us by definition (for example, as a "wise man" or a "just man"). For it is clear that every man who participates in a virtue through a stable habit participates without doubt in the essence of the virtues of God, as [he participates] in the...

natural seed of the good, cultivating it faithfully through his will, and showing the end to be the same as the beginning, and the beginning the same as the end, or rather, that it is the same beginning and end, as one who happens to be an undefiled advocate for God. ^A For if it is believed that the beginning and end of every matter is the purpose existing in it—the beginning as having received from thence the being and the good by nature according to participation, and the end as having completed, by his own judgment and choice, the praiseworthy course leading unerringly toward it, through which he becomes god, receiving the "to be god" from God, as one who has added to the good by nature, which is according to the image, the likeness which is by virtues through choice, by means of the natural ascent and intimacy toward his own beginning—then the apostolic utterance is also fulfilled in him, saying: *In him we live and move and are.* ^B For he comes to be in God through attention, not having corrupted the logos of "being" that pre-exists in God, and he moves in God according to the logos of "well-being" that pre-exists in God, working through the virtues, and he lives in God according to the logos of "ever-being" that pre-exists in God. Hence, already according to the most impassible habit, he is the same to himself and unmoved; and in the future age, according to the given theosis (125 B) [that is, deification], he will lovingly embrace and cherish the aforementioned logoi—or rather, God himself, in whom the logoi of good things are established—that pre-exist in God. And he is a portion of God: as being, due to the logos of his existence in God; and as good, due to the logos of his well-being in God; and as god, due to the logos of his ever-being in God, ^C as one who has honored these, acted according to them, and through them has committed himself entirely to God alone, while at the same time imagining and fashioning God alone entirely unto himself. Thus he also, by grace, both is and is called god, and God, by condescension, both is and is called man for his sake. And in this mutual affection, the virtue is shown which both deifies the man to God through divine love, and makes God man to the man through human love, and brings about, by a good reversal, God as man through the man's deification, and man as God through God's inhumanation. For the Word of God and God desires always and in all things to work the mystery of His own embodiment. ^D But whoever abandons his own beginning, being a portion of God because of the logos of virtue existing in him according to the reason already given, is irrationally carried away toward what is not; and he is rightly said to "flow down" from above, not having moved toward his own beginning and cause—by which, and in which, and through which he has been made—and he is in an unstable fluctuation and a terrible disorder of soul and body, having traversed, away from the unerring and ever-same-existing Cause, toward that which (126 a) is worse.

From which it is also properly said to flow, in that, having the power, in the movement of the soul toward God, to make its steps inseparable, it has voluntarily exchanged what is better, and what truly is, for that which is worse and which is not.

These reasons, of which I spoke, the holy Areopagite Dionysius teaches us to be called by Divine Scripture "predestinations" and "divine wills." Similarly, also those around Pantainus, who became the teacher of the great Clement the author of the *Stromateis*, say they are often called "divine wills" by Scripture. When asked by some who were arrogant in their outward erudition, "How do Christians think that God knows beings?"—for they supposed that He knows what is intelligible intellectually and what is sensible sensibly—they answered that He knows them neither sensibly nor intellectually. For it is not possible, as reason demonstrates, for Him who is above beings to perceive beings through beings; but we say He knows beings as His own wills, adding also the reasonableness of the argument. For if He made all things by will, and no account contradicts this, and it is always pious and just to say that God knows His own will, and He made each of the things that have come to be by willing it, then God knows beings as His own wills, since He made beings by willing them. ^B Moving from this, I myself think that the sayings in Scripture were meant in accordance with these, such as, "I know thee above all," spoken to Moses; and of some, "The Lord knows those who are His own"; and again to some, "I do not know you." Plainly, therefore, the voluntary movement of each one, either in accordance with the will and reason of God, or contrary to the will and reason of God, has prepared one to hear the divine voice.

These and such things, I think, this God-bearing man understood and said, since when we mix this God-like and divine thing, our mind and reason, with its own archetype, the image returns to the archetype for which it now has the longing; and at the same time and in the same way, through these few words, he taught those who think they have ever attained to the measure of any of these beings to withdraw doctrinally, and he declared the reason for how we are a "part of God," and insinuated the property of the future blessed rest, and urged those who are purified and hastening in this hope toward its immovable, unshakable, and nowhere-falling enjoyment. For he knew that, just as we have conceptions of it in essence and reason, through reason and nature we should rightly enter by a simple

^A approach, and we too, without any inquiry—concerning which alone it is to sin and to err—shall know all things in a godlike manner, as far as it is possible, no longer hindered by ignorance of the movement concerning them, as with the great mind and reason and spirit we join our own mind and reason and spirit, or rather, as we advance as an image to the archetypal pattern, our entire selves to the whole of God. Just as he explains in the discourse on hail, saying thus: “And the ineffable light shall receive us, and the contemplation of the holy [127 a] and royal Trinity, illuminating more clearly and purely, and mingled entirely with the whole mind, which indeed I posit alone as the kingdom of heaven,” when it delights and rejoices with pleasure, that I might dare to join my own things to His, ^B every rational creature of angels and of men, as many as, through negligence, have not corrupted any of the divine reasons naturally fitted to them by the Creator regarding their movement toward the end, but rather have temperately preserved their whole selves, and in an unchangeable way, knowing themselves to be, and to become, instruments of the divine nature, whom God, breathing entirely through the whole as a soul, handles as members of a body that are perfect and well-fitted to the Master for His good pleasure, and fills with His own glory and blessedness, giving and bestowing eternal and ineffable life, and in every way free from the cognition of the perceived property formed and established through corruption. This eternal life, clearly, neither the air that is breathed in nor the rivulets of blood flowing from the liver constitute, but God, shared by all as the whole, and becoming in the manner of a soul to the body for the soul, and through the mediation of the soul to the body, as He Himself knows, ^C so that the one may receive unchangeableness, and the other immortality, and the whole human being may be deified, being deified by the grace of the God who became man; the whole human being remaining according to soul and body by nature, and the whole becoming God according to soul and body by grace, and the divine brightness of the blessed glory appropriate to him throughout, after which there is nothing more luminous or higher to conceive. For what is more lovable to those worthy of deification, by which God, being united to those who have been made gods, makes everything His own through goodness? ^D Therefore I have also well named such a state—which is through divine knowledge and the consequent fruit of joy—pleasure and passion and gladness: pleasure, indeed, with good reason, since it is the end of natural operations—for so they define pleasure—but passion as an ecstatic power, drawing the one who suffers to that which acts upon him, according to the paradigmatic cause rendered of the air toward the light and of the fire toward the iron, and persuasively by nature and in truth, that there is nothing else.

^A For besides this is the chapter (that is, the consummation) of beings, which impassibility fittingly follows; and joy as well, since it has nothing to oppose it, neither past nor future. For they say that joy knows no past sadness, nor does it admit of satiety from fear of what is expected, as pleasure does. Hence, those inspired words and our holy Fathers, who were taught the divine mysteries from them, have everywhere ratified "joy" as a demonstrative designation for the future truth that subsists. If, therefore, as in passing—to speak in my own small way—it has been demonstrated naturally, scripturally, and patristically that none of the things that have come into being ever stood still while in motion, nor attained that end [(128 a)] laid upon it according to the divine purpose, and in addition to this, that it is impossible for the stability of those deemed worthy in God to be deflected; how then is it possible—to give some small help from reasoning toward the confirmation of what has been said—that those who have been established substantially in God could receive the ^B intruder, satiety, according to [their] desire? For every satiety, by its own nature and definition, extinguishes desire, and it is constituted in two ways. For either desire is extinguished by circumscribing the subjects as something small, or it is disgusted, spurning them as vile and deformed; and it is from these that satiety is accustomed to happen. But God, subsisting by nature as infinite and precious, is accustomed rather to extend the desire of those enjoying Him by participation toward that which is infinite. If this is true, as indeed it is, then that which is called the "unity of rational beings" did not exist, which, having received satiety, was parted from the stability that is in God and, by its own fragmentation, introduced the generation of this world, lest we make the supreme Good circumscribed and vile, as if limited by some satiety, and as having become the cause of ^C sedition for those whose desire could not hold to that which is immutable. And so, it is in vain, as I think, that some prophesy this, inventing things that do not exist, and, what is more grievous, slandering this blessed Father as if he held such opinions. By this, not only can they—in accordance with their own opinion—freely think that souls come into bodies from a prior mode of life in punishment for past evils, but they may even attempt to deceive others, having them hold this view by citing the trustworthiness of persons—not doing this well or holily, but by leaving aside those who possess the truth and are piously disposed as they are, we ourselves, in addition to what has been said, will contemplate the intellect of the teacher according to another mode. I do not think, therefore, that he ^D relates his human generation

^A but rather wishes to tell the cause of the misery that has come upon it. For, lamenting the wretchedness of our body by saying, "O the conjunction and the separation! I am afraid, I cherish, I am in dread," and the rest, and as if deliberating with himself concerning the cause of the evils by which we are disgraced, and disputing against it with the most wise prudence through that which he says, "What is the wisdom toward me, and what is this great mystery?" he adds the solution, clearly making it thus: "Or does He wish us to be a part of God and from above, so that not being exalted by our worth and contemplating heavenly things we might despise the Creator, but in the struggle and fight ^B against the body, we might always look toward Him, and that the weakness, which is joined to us, might be a discipline of our dignity?" It is as if he said: Since man was made by God out of soul and body for the sake of goodness, for which reason the rational and intellectual soul was given to him—inasmuch as it was formed according to the image of the One who made it—it possesses firmly, through desire and out of its whole strength, the universal charity of God in a cognitive way, and according to the likeness receives deification; ^C yet according to the disciplinal providence toward the subject, and the commandment ordering us to love our neighbor as ourselves, it prudently maintains the body, and through virtues makes it also serve God as a fellow-servant, and through its own mediation it will make the Creator a possessor [of it], and with the given immortality it will bind it to itself with an indissoluble bond, so that what God is to the soul, the soul might become to the body, and the one Creator of all might be shown, entering into all things that exist proportionately through humanity, and those things which are far distant from one another by nature come into one, meeting together around the one nature of man, and God Himself becomes all in all, having embraced and subsisted all things in Himself, so that no longer is the motion of any of the things that exist permitted to be exempt and devoid of His presence, through which we both are—and are called—gods, and children, and body, and members, and a part of God, and things similar to these, in relation to the end of divine contemplation. ^D Since, therefore, man was made both this and for this, yet in our first father he used what was prepared for power toward evil, transferring his desire from that which was permitted to that which was forbidden (for he was of his own power, and chose, having been seduced, both to cling to the Lord and become one spirit, and to cling to a harlot and become one body; and having willed, he cast himself out of the divine and blessed vision, thus, while he was God by grace, preferring by his own choice to become earth), wisely at once and mercifully

^A God, the dispenser of our salvation, fittingly attached the punishment that followed upon the irrational movement of the intellectual power which is in us, punishing with death that very thing ^B according to the logical account—for which, in our mind, we cast away the virtue of love owed to God alone—so that by loving nothing, and by suffering, we might eventually learn repentance and be taught to bring this power back again to Him who truly is.

Proceeding further, he makes this more manifest, saying: "But to me it seems that for this reason none of the goods here are reliable to men, nor long-lasting; but if there is anything else, this too has been contrived by the Artificer Word and by a wisdom surpassing all intellect, by deluding us through things visible, which are changed and transfer in one way at one time and another at another, being carried up and down and wandering, and, before they can be grasped, departing and fleeing—so that, contemplating the instability and anomaly in these, we might transition toward the future. For what would we have done in the present, while that which is good does not remain for us, had we not attributed so much to it; and pleasure and deception have so enslaved us, that we are able to think of nothing better or higher than the present things, even though we have been made in the image of God and hear and believe in the One who is above and draws us to Himself?"

And again, in the sermon to those who live in cities, he says: "So that we may know that we are nothing in comparison to the true and primary wisdom, but may always look only to Him and seek to be illuminated by the splendors from there, since through the inequality of visible and wandering things He conducts us to those things which stand and remain."

It is not therefore, I think, the cause of the generation of humanity itself that the master is declaring in these, as has been said, but rather the misery introduced into our life after our generation because of the transgression—as is manifest to those who meditate more carefully and harmoniously upon his divine letters. For through these words he sets before us the cause of this—the whence, and the through-what, and the for-what, and the on-account-of-what—declaring through it our salvation wisely administered by God; but for that other [the generation itself], in which the mystery of the power has been accomplished, he has used another mode of discourse, making his whole pious intention regarding this manifest, as is shown in the discourse *On the Nativity*, saying: ^D "Reason, then, and sense, thus separated from one another, stood within their own definitions, and bore within themselves the greatness of the Creator Word, silent praisers of the magnificence and loud-voiced heralds; but there was not yet a mixture of both, nor any commixtion of contraries, an indication of greater wisdom and of the abundance of perfection regarding natures, nor were all the treasures of goodness known. This, then, the Artificer Word, wishing to display, and a living being out of both,

to show, an animal one, I mean, from invisible and visible nature, he creates man. And from matter, which had already been prepared, he takes the body, but implants life from himself (the Word knows this to be a rational soul and an icon of God), and establishes him upon the earth as a sort of second world, great in small, another angel, a composite worshiper, and the rest. And in the discourse On the Lights, he says: "Since this is so, or is this the case? It was necessary that worship should not be circumscribed only to those on high, but that there should be some worshipers below as well, so that all things might be filled with the glory of God, since they are also God's. And for this reason man is created, honored by the hand of God and by his image." I suppose these things are sufficient, even if they appear small, for one who does not judge contentiously or think it glorious merely to argue, to show the entire understanding of the master concerning what has been said. ^B If, however, there is still resistance regarding how the master called us a portion of God, the argument about this has already been given above in many ways. But that it may be more credible, relying on the words of the Spirit, the holy and blessed apostle Paul, who received the wisdom hidden in God before the ages and illuminated the entire lightless life of men, and drove the darkness of ignorance from their souls, will suffice, as he speaks to the Ephesians regarding this, saying: "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him, having enlightened the eyes of your heart, that you may know what is the hope of his calling, ^C and what are the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the operation of the might of his strength which he wrought in Christ, raising him from the dead and seating him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above every principality and power and virtue and dominion and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come, and he put all things under his feet, and he gave him as head over all to the Church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all." And after a little, he says again: "And he gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints unto the work of ministry, ^D unto the edification of the body of Christ, until we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, that we may no longer be children, tossed and carried about by every wind of doctrine, in the trickery of men, in craftiness for the art of error; but truly speaking in love, let us grow up in all things into him who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitly framed and knit together through every ministry by him, according to the operation of each individual member, in-

craftiness, toward the method of deceit; but speaking the truth in love, we may grow up in him in all things, who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body is fitly framed and knit together through every ligament 131 of the supply, according to the operation of each individual member, causing the increase of the body unto the edification of itself in love.

I do not think, therefore, that one who has learned to live piously in order to the manifestation of the truth truly believed according to the Christians stands in need of any other testimony, since they learn through it that we are both members and body and fullness of Christ our God, who fills all in all, according to the purpose hidden in God and the Father before the ages, being recapitulated in him through his Son and our Lord Jesus Christ, our God. For what is the mystery that was hidden from the ages and from the generations, but now made manifest through the true and perfect inhumanation of the Son of God, who united to himself according to hypostasis, inseparably and unconfusedly, our nature, and through that holy flesh of his, which was taken from us and animated intellectually and rationally, joined us to himself as if by first fruits, and deigned to make us one and the same with himself through his humanity? Just as we were predestined before the ages to be in him as members of his body, he joined us to himself in the Spirit after the manner of a soul to a body, and brought us into the measure of the spiritual stature of the fullness that is in him, and showed that we also were created unto this, and that the purpose of God, most good toward us before the ages, received no innovation according to its own concept, but came to fulfillment through another, clearly, more recent mode that was introduced. For it was necessary for God—who created us like unto himself (by our possessing the clear marks of his goodness by participation, and by his having foreseen our existence in him before the ages, and by his granting us the mode leading to this most blessed end through the good use of natural powers; but, when man voluntarily expelled this mode through the misuse of those natural powers), in order that man might not become a wanderer far from God—to introduce another mode more wondrous and more divine than the former, inasmuch as that which is above nature is superior to that which is according to nature. And this is the mystery of God’s most mystical sojourn toward men, as we all believe. For, says the divine Apostle, if that first covenant had been faultless, then 132 there would no place have been sought for a second. And indeed it is clear to all that the mystery which took place in Christ at the end of the age is without doubt the demonstration and consummation of that which was placed in the Forefather at the beginning of the age. Was it then useful that the word of "portion" was spoken by the Teacher, according to the modes that have been rendered? And may every noble-minded person receive both the soul and the mode of that which is thus spoken, bearing towards himself no malice of thoughts, knowing that the same...

^A portion is, in such matters, equivalent to the member. For if the member is a part of the body, and the member is the same as the portion, then the member will be the same as the portion. And if the portion is the same as the member, and the accumulation and composition of members makes an organic body, and an organic body united to an intellectual soul 132B shows a perfect human being, then he who says that the soul or the body or a member of it is a part of the human being will not be deviating from the truth. If, however, the body exists as an instrument of the intellectual soul—which is the human being—and the soul, being simple in nature and incorporeal, fills the whole body and gives it life and movement, not being divided along with or confined to it, but being present wholly to the whole and to each of its members, just as each has been naturally formed to receive it according to the faculty receptive of its operation that is naturally underlying it, and holding together the differently receptive members proportionally for the maintenance of the body as one; then let him be guided toward the great and ineffable mystery of the blessed hope of Christians, taking from the small and familiar things the likenesses of those things that are great and above us—he who still possesses an unsettled and unsteady mind concerning these matters. And leaving behind the irrational opinion about souls preexisting bodies, let him believe with us in the Lord who says regarding those who rise in the resurrection that they cannot die, because of the manifestation and participation ^C of His own most pure and ultimate desired object. And again, “Everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die” (John XI, 26). If this had happened at any time previously, it would have been impossible—as has been shown before—for them to receive death by any kind of alteration. And let him not step outside of natural reasoning 133A in vain, proclaiming an opinion about the soul that is not real. For if the body and the soul are human parts, as has been set forth before, and parts necessarily receive a relation to something (for the whole necessarily possesses that category), and things called "relative" are among those that are always and in every way simultaneous in their generation—as parts constitute the whole species by their union, being separated from one another only by intent for the sake of discerning what each is according to its essence—then it is impossible for the soul and the body, as parts of a man, to preexist or postexist temporally one another, since the logic of what is called "relative" will be destroyed. And again: If every species exists by itself before the body, whether it be soul or body, or if each of these creates another species through the composition of soul with body, or body with soul, they either do this through undergoing change, or through being naturally constituted as such. And if it were through undergoing change, they would have passed into that which they were not, and so they perish; but if they were naturally constituted as such, this clearly works by that which is natural, and the soul will never cease from being enbodied, nor the body from being ensouled. But this is not so, just as the ultimate object did not previously exist

not through the passion or the natural power of the parts in relation to the union of one with the other, nor through the completion of the whole according to species, but through that which exists in them simultaneously according to the species of the whole of generation. Is it not possible, therefore, without corruption, to pass from species to species, whatever the species may be? But if, because the soul exists and subsists after the death and dissolution of the body, they say that it is also able to exist and subsist before the body, their reasoning, it seems to me, proceeds without due consideration. For the reason for generation and the reason for essence are not the same. The former is a clarification of "when," "where," and "in relation to what" something is, while the latter is a clarification of "what it is" and "how it is." If this is so, the soul always exists after it has come into being by virtue of its essence, but it is not ^B left alone by virtue of its generation; rather, it exists with the relation of "when," "where," and "in relation to what." For the soul, after the death of the body, is not called simply "soul," but the "soul of a man," and the "soul of a particular man." For even after the body, it possesses its whole species, in accordance with the habit, as a human part predicated as a whole. Likewise, the body is mortal by its nature, but not left alone by its generation. For the body, after the separation of the soul, is not called simply "body," but the "body of a man," and the "body of a particular man," even if it is corrupted and is naturally inclined to be resolved into the elements of which it consists. For thus, too, it possesses its whole species, in accordance with the habit, as a human part predicated as a whole. Therefore, ^C in both—I mean the soul and the body—the relation, being understood inseparably as parts of the whole human species, sets forth their simultaneous generation and demonstrates their difference in essence from one another, in no way harming the reasons naturally inherent in them according to essence. It is therefore impossible to find or speak of a body or a soul without relation. For with the one, the fact that it belongs to something is introduced for the other; so if one precedes the other, the other must be understood as belonging to something. For the relation is unchanging. And so much for these matters. And if the discourse has not fallen away from the truth, thanks be to God, who through your prayers has guided us to understand it well. But if in some place it has fallen short of the truth, you should know the precision of the argument, as those inspired by God with the knowledge of such things.

From the same discourse, on the words: "Even while matter, of itself, bears the unordered, as if in a flux."

I think that the present intention of the discourse involves the meaning of the previous chapter. For since it passed over very many things against those who are lovers of matter and of the body, it added these things, so that from this point they might be able to piously understand.

^A Since man was glorified by God with the beauty of incorruptibility and immortality, but preferred the ugliness of the material nature around him to the intellectual beauty, he became forgetful of the dignity of his soul, and even more so of God, who had fashioned the soul in a divine likeness, making it entirely worthy of the divine judgment. Therefore, he reaped a fruit worthy of his intention, according to the divine decree which wisely orchestrates our salvation: he reaped not only the corruption and death of the body, and its readiness and susceptibility to every passion, but also the instability and irregularity of the material substance outside and around him, and its propensity and ease for change. For God, because of the transgression, then commingled it with our body ^B (134 B) and allowed it, like the body, to be subject to change, and to suffer and be corrupted and to be altogether dissolved; as is shown by the garment of skins of mortals in paradise, by which, according to what is written, He implanted power, saying: "For the creation itself was subjected to corruption, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope" (Rom. VIII, 20); for from the beginning, by His foreknowledge, He had thus created it, because of the transgression foreseen in man, so that by suffering and being harmed through it, he might come to a consciousness of himself and of his own dignity, and might gladly accept the separation from the body, and the body's own release. For the all-wise provider of our life often allows things to move naturally according to their own impulses for our benefit, at times ^C managing them through the confusion and disturbance around them and arising from them; and by this means, He leads our irrational love for present things back to what is lovable by nature. For there being three universal modes, by which they say our passions are educationally healed, through each mode the disorderly nature of matter is wisely governed—orderly, according to a reason that is above us and better—toward the good and beautiful perfection known to God, and is set as a medicine for the grievous burden of the passions. For we are either paying the penalty for sins committed in the past, of which we perhaps retain no trace in our memory (135 A) because of ignorance, or perhaps even if we remember them, we do not endure to apply the necessary correction to our transgressions, whether because we are unwilling or because we are unable, due to the acquired habit of wickedness; or we are being purged of weakness, or we repel the wickedness that is present and pervasive, and we are fore-instructed to look toward the habitual state of the future life; or one man, through firm endurance and pious fortitude, is set forth as a marvelous example to other men, a man who is noble in intelligence and glorious in virtue, and capable by himself of manifesting the hidden truth undauntedly against terrors. ^D

^A He exhorts, therefore, those who are not able to conceive of anything beyond the present life not to trust in the health of the body, nor, because of the course of affairs which flows according to the current, to exalt themselves against those who are deprived of these things, as long as the present life stands and we are clothed in this corruption, around which there is change and mutability; for it is uncertain what will happen to them from the instability and turbulence of the body and external things. For I think he means this by the phrase: “As long as matter carries the disorderly within itself,” ^B instead of saying: "As long as this whole is under corruption and mutability, and we are clothed in the body of humiliation, and are likewise, by reason of our innate weakness, subjected to various evils arising from it"; so that we may not exalt ourselves against one another by reason of the inequality that exists among us, but rather, by a sober exercise of reason, smooth out the inequality of our nature, which is of equal honor, by supplying the deficiencies of others with our own superabundance. For this reason, perhaps, the present inequality of life was permitted, so that the power of the reason within us might be shown, honoring virtue above all else. For the change and mutability of the body and of external things is the same for all men, carrying and being carried, and possessing as its only stable and firm element that which is unstable and fleeting. ^C

*From the same, from his discourse on Saint Athanasius, on the passage: “For it has nothing higher than what it has entirely.”*

It seems to me that this God-bearing teacher, by these words, has absolved the one being taught from every comparative and discretive, and in any other way expressed, habit. For those who are wise in such matters say that this type of speech is unbounded, and that it can be said to be incomparably above all things, since it has the power of supereminent negation.

*From the same discourse, on the passage: “To whom, therefore, it was permitted, through reason and contemplation, to pass through matter and this carnal thing—whether one must call it a cloud or a veil—to be with God and to be mingled with the purest light, as far as is possible for human nature; ^D this blessed man, through the ascent from here and the deification there, which to philosophize about sincerely is a gift, and to rise above the material duality through the unity understood in the Trinity.”*

I, for my part, do not think that the interpretation has fallen short.

^A For if some, as you have written, suppose that the account rendered concerning the virtue of the holy teacher intends, by that, to speak of the philosophy of those who have attained it as being solely by reason and contemplation, apart from action—and that it is, on the contrary, disjointed from the true judgment and operation concerning the existing things, which is the philosophy that I myself, though bold, define as the only truly most complete one—I, for my part, receive it as having introduced this more openly, demonstrating that it is corrected by reason and contemplation. For action and the judgment that is within it are entirely joined to reason, being grasped through contemplation; since it is the work of reason to order the motion of the body, as if by some bridle, through right deliberation, holding it back in a disciplined way from the path toward inconsistency, while it is the work of contemplation to judge prudently and to choose those things which have been well understood and discerned, ^B acting as a most brilliant light through true knowledge that shows the truth itself. By both of these, every wise virtue is especially created and preserved, and by them, it is also made manifest through the body—though not in its entirety. For it is not contained by the body, being a character of divine power, but rather certain shadows of it are—and this not for its own sake, but for the sake of those who are stripped of the grace that is according to it, so that they might come to imitate the godlike manner of life of men who love God; in order that, through participation in the good, they too, having laid aside the shame of wickedness, might become partakers of the lot worthy of God, or that those needing some assistance might obtain it from those who are able to perform it, so that, having received through the body, by a manifest action, the disposition hidden in the depth of the soul of those who are virtuous, they might praise the providence of God, which is made all things to all men and is present to all through all. For if there were no one who needed to be treated well, or who needed to be formed by example toward virtue, each one would be entirely sufficient for himself, enjoying the gifts of the virtues according to the soul. And without their proof to the manifest through the body, it is not absurd to say so. ^C He, therefore, who piously understands through contemplation how existing things have their being, and through reasonable counsel purposefully and rightly defines the account regarding them, and keeps his own judgment—or rather keeps himself irreprehensible in his judgment—possesses every virtue together at once. Being no longer moved toward anything else after the truth has been made known, he has passed by all things with haste, making no account at all of those things that are and are called of the flesh and of the world, already having the action formed and contained within itself by reason without conflict; for he brings to himself all the most powerful, impassible reasons of our intellect, by which every virtue and knowledge both is and consists, ^D since they are powers of the rational soul, which are not at all in need of the body for their existence, but which, in order to be manifest for the sake of the reasons...

^A of the times, he did not refuse to use. For they say that those things belonging to the intellect are, specifically, the notions of intelligible things, the virtues, the sciences, the reasons for the arts, the power of choice, and the power of deliberation; and, generally, the judgments, the assents, the avoidances, and the impulses. Of these, some belong solely to contemplation according to the intellect, while others belong to the scientific power according to [discursive] reason. If the saints indeed preserved their own life kept safe by these, then that blessed man—comprehensively, by way of reason and contemplation—introduced all the reasons concerning virtue and knowledge grasped by the saints, through which, knowingly receiving divine knowledge by way of contemplation, and prudently fitting the divine form to themselves according to reason through the virtues, he judged that it was by no means necessary to name action by way of the body, knowing that it is not the producer of virtue, but its manifestor, and ^B only the minister of divine thoughts and disputations.

But that what is said might be manifest also by another way, those who carefully traverse the reasons of our affairs say that the rational [faculty] has a contemplative and an active [part]: the contemplative, which is according to the intellect, as it considers the things that are, and the active, which is according to deliberation, which defines for those in the active life the right reason. They call the contemplative the intellect, and the active reason; and the one, wisdom, and the other, prudence. If this is true, the teacher therefore named action from its cause, as is logical, and not from the matter, calling it a reason that possesses no opposing habit. For the contemplative person abides in the truth rationally and knowingly, and not ^C by way of enmity and contention; and for the sake of the pleasure of these things, he does not endure to see anything else beside them.

If it is necessary, however, to make this still clearer in another way, those who have exercised the reasons of perfection according to virtue say again that those who have not yet reached the state of being purified from the communion through habit with matter are occupied with active things, since their judgment with regard to the things that are is still mixed for them; and they are changeable, not yet having laid aside the habit regarding changeable things. But some, through the summit of virtue, approach God according to habit and, enjoying the blessedness of His contemplation, have turned ^D toward themselves alone and toward God by sincerely breaking the bonds of material habit; they are perfectly alienated from actions regarding matter, and become familiar with contemplation and with God. Therefore, they say, they remain unchangeable, no longer having the habit toward matter, by which anyone who is mastered according to habit by matter is naturally accustomed to be moved against nature by force, together with matter as it is naturally moved.

^A For to him who wishes to be liberated from it, towards the putting aside of material attachment, the master says: "To whom, therefore, it was permitted, advancing by reason and contemplation through matter and this carnal thing—whether one must call it a cloud or a veil—to be joined to God," and the rest. [138 A]

How the flesh is a cloud and a veil.

Why does the master say that the flesh is a cloud and a veil? Seeing, indeed, that every human soul that errs and looks back from its natural motion moves, instead, around passion and sense and sensible things, not having elsewhere to move, falls short of that motion which naturally bears it towards God; and it has divided the flesh into passion and sense, for of the animate flesh it has declared both of these through the "cloud" and the "veil." For the cloud is the carnal passion that overshadows the principal part of the soul, and the veil is the error according to sense, which binds it to the surfaces of sensible things and hinders the transition to intelligible things; through these, the soul, receiving forgetfulness of natural goods, converts its whole operation around sensible things, finding within itself, through these things that have been mentioned, dishonorable passions, concupiscences, and pleasures.

How pleasure comes to be.

^C For every pleasure in things that are forbidden is accustomed to come to be entirely from passion, through the medium of sense, towards some sensible object. For pleasure is nothing else than a species of sense, formed in the sensitive faculty by some sensible thing, or a mode of sensitive operation constituted by irrational concupiscence. For concupiscence, when added to sense, is turned into pleasure, adding to it the species, and sense, having been moved by concupiscence, works pleasure, receiving a certain sensible thing.

Knowing, therefore, the saints [138 ] that the soul, moved against nature through the medium of the flesh towards matter, puts on a terrestrial form, they, rather, through the medium of the soul moved according to nature towards God, understood that the flesh also could be fittingly made to serve God, by the institution of virtues, adorning it acceptably with divine manifestations.

How and how many the motions of the soul are.

For they taught that the soul has three universal motions, gathered into one by charity: one according to the mind, another according to reason, and the third according to sense; and one, indeed, which is simple and lacking interpretation, through which, in an unknown way, being moved concerning God, it in no way whatsoever...

knows him from any of the things that are, on account of his preeminence. The second is according to the definitive cause of the unknown, through which, being naturally moved, it imposes upon itself—by way of knowledge—all the natural reasons on which it is based, which exist as formative factors of the one who is known only by way of cause, through an operation. The third is the composite one, through which, touching upon the things outside, it reforms within itself the reasons of visible things as if from certain signs; and having magnanimously passed through these, according to the true and unerring mode of movement according to nature, they transcended the present age of struggles. They raised up sense, ^B simply, through the intermediary of the reason, to the mind, as it possesses only the spiritual reasons of sensible things; and they united the reason, uniformly, through one simple and indivisible prudence, to the mind that possesses the reasons of the things that are. They offered the mind itself—having been purely freed from all movement concerning the things that are, and resting even from its own natural operation—to God, whereby, having been gathered together wholly toward God, they were deemed worthy to be permeated wholly by God through the Spirit. They bore the image of the heavenly reality as much as is possible for human beings, and they were drawn to such an extent by the divine impression, if it is permissible to say this, as they themselves were joined to God having been drawn. ^C For they say that God and man are examples to one another, and that God is made man through his love for mankind only to the extent that man, strengthened by love, has been able to deify himself for God; and that man is caught up by God according to the mind to the unknown, only to the extent that man has made the God who is invisible by nature manifest through the virtues. Therefore, by this philosophy, which is established according to reason and contemplation, through which the nature of the body is also necessarily ennobled, the saints, wounded without error by the divine desire, arrived worthily and beautifully at God through the natural impressions toward divine things implanted in them. Marching athletically through body and cosmos, they viewed these things as being linked to one another, the one by nature, the other by sense, and one falling under the other by means of the peculiar property of the change of the one toward the other. And, judging that none of these things exist in accordance by their own reason, free from circumscription, and that it is shameful ^D for the immortal and ever-moving soul to be corrupted and circumscribed by things mortal and circumscribed, they bound themselves inseparably to the only immortal God, who is above all infinity, in no way yielding to the refluxes of the cosmos and the flesh, which is the fullness of all virtue and knowledge; and I believe that it is also the end. But even if the saints are sometimes moved concerning the spectacles of the things that are, they are not moved to them in order to primarily view and know them themselves in a material way, as we are, but so that, through all and in all, the one who exists and appears...

^A as God, they might praise in many ways and gather unto themselves a great power of wonder and a cause for glorification. For having received from God a soul possessing intellect, reason, and sensation—not only the intelligible sensation, but also this perceptible one, just as they have the [inner] reason alongside the spoken word, and the [intellectual] intellect alongside the sensible [or passional] one (which they also call the 'animal phantasy,' by which other animals, and one another, and us, and the places they have traversed, are recognized; about which phantasy those who are wise in such matters say that sensation is constituted, being its organ, through which it receives those things that have been imagined through it)—they reckoned that the operations of these things ought to be offered, reasonably, not to themselves, but to the God who gave them, through whom and from whom all things exist. For, having been educated from a careful consideration of beings regarding the three universal modes, as far as is possible for humans, in which ^B God has made all things (for the Creator has constituted us for being, and for well-being, and for being always), and that two are extremes, dependent only on God as Cause, while the other is intermediate, hanging also upon our own choice and movement, and—through itself—granting the extremes what is properly called [being], and in whose absence the name [of well-being] becomes improper for them, when they do not have the well-being joined to them—they understood that the truth which is in the extremes cannot otherwise be present to them and be kept safe, except by what is accustomed to effect that well-being through the intermediate mixed with the extremes, which they understood through the movement from it [the intermediate] always toward God. And subsequently, extending the contemplative power of the soul by natural reason ^C from this point, and [learning] that in a certain way one ought not to use the natural operations invertedly, because of the corruption which necessarily attends the natural powers due to the mode of misuse, having heard the Word itself clearly crying out, they were taught to be carried smoothly according to the becoming reason of nature toward its own Cause, so that from where existence is simply theirs, they might eventually receive the 'true-being' added to it. For what profit would there be, they said, reasoning with themselves, to one who is not the cause of his own existence, if he were to be moved toward himself or something else other than God, when, in the reason of his own [true] being, he could acquire nothing for himself from himself or from any other ^D besides God? For this reason, [they taught] the intellect to be concerned only with God and His virtues, and to approach the ineffable glory of His blessedness ignorantly; [they taught] the reason to become an interpreter of the intelligible realities and a hymn-singer, and to discuss rightly the modes that unify [the soul] to them; and [they taught] the sensation, having been ennobled by reason, to imagine the diverse powers and operations in the universe, and to announce to the soul, as far as is possible, the reasons of those things which exist; and, through the intellect and the reason, having wisely steered the soul like a ship, they traversed this liquid, unstable, and—by turns—wildly carried path of life, which swamps the sensation, with dry footprints.

Contemplation of the passing of Moses through the sea.

^A Thus, perhaps, that great Moses himself, by the stroke of the almighty Word—of which, if I am not mistaken, the rod was the symbol—having divided the sea, which was a figure of the deception of sensible things, or, to speak more appropriately, having scattered it, provided the people, who were hastening toward the divine promises, with dry and stable ground. He showed that nature, which falls under sensation, is, by right reason, something perceptible and capable of being defined, and something passable and easily crossed by a life adorned with virtues; and that it offers no danger to those who pass through it in this manner from the force of the waters, which were separated on both sides and by which they had previously been covered. For in the anagogical sense, the dividing of the waters of this intelligible sea is the separation of the vices—which, by deficiency and excess, are opposed to the virtues—from their mutual continuity, a separation which ^B reason is accustomed to effect by seizing them by the heart, and by not allowing them in any way to be joined together for those who are hastening forward with vehemence toward God.

Contemplation of the ascent of Moses into the mountain.

Thus, again obeying God who was calling him, and having surpassed all things here below, he entered into the darkness where God was; that is to say, into an obscure, unseen, and incorporeal way of life, with a mind free from any relation to anything whatsoever apart from God. Having attained here the highest dignity that human nature can obtain—an attainment worthy as the reward of that blessed ascent—he receives knowledge that describes the origin of time and nature. Having set God before him as a type and example of the virtues, in whose image, like a tablet that beautifully reflects an archetype, he shaped himself, he descended from the mountain. By his face, he made known to other men the grace of the glory he had received, as though he were generously representing and offering himself as a type of the divine type, and by doing this, he ^C reveals and explains to the people the things he saw and heard, and by writing he bequeaths the divine mysteries to posterity, as a kind of God-given inheritance.

Contemplation of the leadership of Jesus, and of the crossing of the Jordan, and of the second circumcision performed by him with stone knives.

Thus Jesus, the successor of Moses—if I may pass over many of the things told about him on account of their number—having taken the people (who had already been educated in piety in many ways in the desert) after the death of Moses on the mountain, and having purified them with that strange form of circumcision ^D by means of stone knives, and having caused the Jordan to dry up through the preceding entrance of the divine ark, led all the people of the nation across on dry land, through him, the Savior.

^A This passage figuratively manifest the Savior Word, who, after the passing away of the letter of the legal ordinances, assumed the leadership of the true Israel—that which truly sees God—and which now arises in the height of contemplation. He circumcises, by the most sharp word of faith in him, every defilement of both soul and body, and frees it from every reproach of those who incite toward sin; he transfers the flowing nature of time and of things in flux toward the state of the bodiless, possessing upon the shoulders of the virtues the knowledge capable of receiving the divine mysteries.

Contemplation of Jericho, and the seven circuits, and the ark, and the trumpets, and the anathema.

^B Thus, again, by seven circuits and as many trumpets, with a mystical shout, he shook down the city of Jericho—thought to be difficult to capture or even impregnable—and mystically revealed the same Word of God as conqueror of the world and completer of the age, by mind and word, that is, by knowledge and virtue. Of this, the ark and the trumpets were the types, teaching those who follow him that the sensible age is easy to capture and with no effort superable, and that lovers of divine goods have no need of anything in it, because it is joined to death and destruction and is a cause of divine wrath. Achan, the son of Charmi, who is the turbulent and material-loving thought that introduces some of the sensible things, shows this by suffering that pitiable death according to the divine decree; the operative reason ^C is the one that suffocates such a one, as worthy of such punishment, in the depth of an evil conscience.

Contemplation of Tyre and its king, and its capture.

Thus, again, according to what is written: *At that time Hazor was captured, and its king killed by the sword, and every living thing destroyed in it, which was before the mistress of all the regions,* there were displayed the mysteries whose types those words had set forth: namely, that our true Savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the destroyer of evil powers and dispenser of the gifts of grace, at the time of his incarnation, having seized sin and its king, the devil, through the cross (for sin once reigned over all), put them to death by the command of his power; he destroyed every living thing in it—that is, the passions that are in us and the shameful and evil thoughts connected with them—so that in no way at all, in those who profess the name of Christ and live in him, would sin have any longer the power to move and live like some living thing.

Contemplation on the passage: “The heavens declare the glory of God.”

Contemplation on the passage: “My father and my mother have forsaken me.”

Contemplation on the vision of Elijah in the cave of Horeb.

^A by making God manifest through familiarity to those who offer sacrifices, and by killing the reasonings and demons who are the teachers of wickedness, he frees those who have been mastered by the servitude of the passions. After all these things, he was mystically taught by that voice in which God was present—a gentle breeze—having perceived the pronunciation of the Word and the modes of life and customs, in a divine and peaceful and utterly immaterial and simple state, devoid of any form or shape, which can neither be spoken nor shown. Marvelling at its glory and struck by its beauty, and desiring rather to be one with it than merely to follow it—that is, wishing not only to fight for the truth but to be entirely with the Truth, and to see or know nothing that would stand in the way of his fully knowing God who is all in all—he deemed it far more precious, while still in the flesh, to be preserved towards this ^B, having traversed matter by the divine path of the virtues as a veil for the pure intellect's passage to intelligible things, and as a cloud of the flesh darkening the soul's ruling principle through its own passions, so that he himself might become a partaker of the ineffable goods which he had desired, in so far as one who still dwells in corruptible flesh can attain this, and so that the faith in the things proclaimed might, if I am not mistaken, be confirmed for us also. For God granted this to him by means of the things thus mystically performed, crying out ineffably that it is more profitable than any other good to be with God alone in peace.

Contemplation on Elisha, his disciple

Contemplation on Anna and Samuel

^A that debt, judging it possesses nothing as its own, to such an extent that it indicates the one God to be both the giver and the receiver: just as somewhere the law says: "My gifts, my offerings, my sacrifices, my sacrifices, you shall observe to offer to me" (Deut. xxviii, 4); for since every good thing is born from Him and ends in Him. For the Word of God is naturally suited to those in whom He has come to be, both to abolish the movements of the flesh and to restrain the inclination of the soul toward them, and to fill it with every true knowledge.

Contemplation on him who excommunicates an impure house.

Contemplation on the holy Elijah, and on the Sareptan widow.

Contemplation on the transfiguration of the Lord.

^A laying aside the life according to the flesh, through the change of the sensory energies of which the Spirit made them capable, having removed the veils of the passions from their intellectual power. By this means, being purified, they were instructed in the spiritual reasons of the mysteries demonstrated to them. They were mystically taught that the radiance of His face, shining forth like a ray of light, overcoming every faculty of the eyes, was a symbol of His divinity which transcends intellect, sense, essence, and knowledge. They were led by the hand to the understanding that, because He has no form or beauty, but rather, as the Word made flesh, He is recognized as being beautiful beyond the sons of men, both being in the beginning and with God and being God; and, by the theological negation which proclaims Him entirely imperceptible to all, they were led gnostically to the glory of the Only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. As for the white garments, they were instructed that these bear the symbol of the words of the Holy Scripture, as they had then become clear, manifest, and lucid to them, stripped of every difficult enigma and symbolic shadow, and understood—revealing the reason which was veiled within them—when they practiced a ready and sincere knowledge of God and had been set free from the pursuit of the world and the flesh. Or indeed, they [the garments] bear the symbol of creation itself, after the filthy [opinion] of those who are deceived and enslaved solely to sense, which for a time seemed to be represented in it, had been destroyed. Through the wise variety of the different species that fill it, creation, like a garment, indicates the dignity of Him who bears the power of the creative Word. For both sayings apply reasonably to the Word, since in both, because of us, the obscurity remains hidden—lest we dare to rush unworthily at those things which are imperceptible: in the voice of Holy Scripture as Word, and in creation as Creator, Maker, and Artificer. Whence I say that he who wishes to walk the straight path to God without blame necessarily needs both: both knowledge of Scripture in the Spirit, and the natural contemplation of beings according to the Spirit; so that he may be able to demonstrate that the two laws, the natural and the written, are equal in dignity and teach the same doctrine, and that neither is superior or inferior to the other, as is fitting for one who desires to become a perfect lover of wisdom, and who perfectly desires wisdom.

Contemplation of the natural and written law and their congruity according to their connection with one another.

I understand one law, which directs itself as much as possible according to reason through the spectacles united in it, as though it were a book ^D that harmoniously orders the entire fabric of the universe in a way that...

ὕφασμα having letters and syllables, which are the first elements to us—proximate and particular, and made dense by many qualities of bodies through their gathering—while the words, which are more universal than these, are those that are further removed and more subtle, from which the Word, who has wisely sketched and ineffably inscribed himself upon them, is completed when read; inasmuch as it offers not only what [a thing] is, but also the concept of whatever it might be; and through the pious collection of different phantasms leading [the reader] into a single apprehension of the truth, it gives itself, as the Creator, to be seen proportionately through things visible. And that which is accomplished by learning, through what is wisely dictated as another world—composed of heaven and earth and the things between them, I mean of moral, natural, and theological philosophy—[it] reveals the ineffable power of Him who dictated it, and it shows that they are the same as one another through their reciprocal exchange: the written [Word] being according to its power equal to the natural [Word], and conversely the natural equal to the written in its habit, and both declaring and covering the same Word—the one by the utterance and the visible appearance, the other by the understanding and the hidden meaning.

^B For the holy Scripture, calling the words garments and the meanings the flesh of the Word, by the former covers and by the latter reveals unto us; so too, regarding the things that have happened, calling the appearances and forms projected for our sight [its] garments, and considering the reasons according to which these were created as [its] flesh, in the same way we cover by the former and reveal by the latter. For the Word, being the Creator and Legislator of all, lies hidden while appearing, existing by nature as invisible, and appears while hidden, not being believed by the wise to be thin by nature. May it be for us, therefore, to manifest the hidden by way of negation, and rather to pass beyond the whole power of figures and riddles that imitates the truth, and to be ineffably carried upward from the letter and the appearances to the Word Himself by the power of the Spirit, rather than to hide this which appears by the very postulation; lest we also, becoming murderers of the Word, should worship the creature instead of the Creator in the manner of the Greeks, ^C believing nothing to be more magnificent than the things seen and perceived by the senses, or—looking only as far as the letter—regarding only the body in the manner of the Jews, and making the belly our God, ^D and considering shame to be glory, we might bear away the same lot as the murderers of God—as [the Word] who for our sake, because of us, and among us, has assumed a body, and thickened Himself through syllables and letters for the sake of the senses, while turning the inclination toward Himself, not discerning the Word.

For the divine Apostle says: The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. For indeed the letter, when loved only for its own sake, customarily kills the Word that inhabits it for those who love it, just as the beauty of the created things—not [directed] toward the glory of Him who made them...

(Philipp. iii, 19. II Cor. iii, 6.) [alt-version omitted]

tends to deprive the observers of rational modesty. And again the Gospel: *Unless those days were shortened*, that is, [the days] of wickedness, *no flesh would be saved*, that is, no pious conception concerning God. For the days of wickedness are cut short, since the judgment that constructs them according to sensation is delimited by the Word, and follows after the pious ordinance [prescribed] by Him. For the law of the flesh differs in no way from Antichrist, always warring against the spirit and opposing His own divine law, so long as the present life is welcome and desirable to those who have allowed themselves to be bound by it, and the Word, having not yet arisen with the utterance of power, has not destroyed it, by distinguishing the mortal from the immortal and by expelling the oppressive servitude from freedom, both making the truth itself pure from falsehood through itself, and separating ^B material and temporal things from divine and eternal ones—things to which the mind, through its familiarity with them by sensation, is naturally prone to incline, and by irrational affection, to be put to death.

Yet it is especially and primarily for this *that* the theoprepeian descent of the Word takes place, awakening it from the death of ignorance, recalling it from the affection and study of material things, and leading back its appetite toward that which is lovable by nature. Therefore, I judge it necessary that those who are rational, and who through reason hasten toward the Word (just as the Word Himself says: *Is not the soul more than food, and the body than clothing?*) should take care of the body, which far excels its garments—that is, the body of divine and sublime thoughts, of the holy Scriptures, and of the spectacles of creation—lest we be reproved at the proper time, having grasped none of these, and having failed to take hold of the Word who exists and who brings all things into existence, like that Egyptian woman who, having laid hold only of the garments of Joseph, ^C utterly missed the company of her beloved.

For thus, indeed, both the garments of the Word—I mean to say, the utterances of Scripture—and the visible creatures, being bright and glorious through the change of the doctrines concerning them and befitting the divine Word through high contemplation, we also, having ascended the mountain of divine transfiguration, shall behold, no longer being persuasively hindered from the blessed touch of the Word, as Mary Magdalene, who had taken the Lord Jesus for a gardener, did—thinking the Creator of things that fall under generation and corruption to be nothing as yet above sensation—but we shall see and adore Him who is alive from the dead, who entered in to us through closed doors, after the sensual activity in us has been completely extinguished, and we shall recognize the Word Himself and God, who is all in all, and who has made all His own intellectual things to be a body, and the sensible things to be a garment, for the sake of His goodness. ^D Concerning which it seems not inappropriate to think that it was said: *All of them shall grow old like a garment*, on account of the perishing of the

visible mind, *and like a mantle you will fold them, and they shall be changed*, on account of the expected grace of immortality.

A brief exposition of the five modes of natural contemplation.

In addition to these things, we shall also know the ^A *logoi*—that is, the ones that are furthest-reaching and yet reachable by us, of which creation is set forth as a teacher—and the five modes of contemplation conjoined with them; by dividing creation through these, the saints gathered for themselves the mystical *logoi* therein with piety, distributing it into essence, and motion, and difference, and mixture, and position. They said that three of these are primarily apt for the knowledge of God and have been put forth as guides: the one concerning essence, the one concerning motion, the one concerning difference, through which God becomes known to men, as they gather the impressions of Him from the things that are, as Creator and Provider and Judge. Two they said are pedagogical toward virtue and intimacy with God: the one concerning mixture and the one concerning position, through which man, being fashioned, becomes god (148) by experiencing the being of God from the things that are, forming for himself according to the intellect the whole impression of God—which is according to goodness—as if he were seeing it, and forming it within himself most sincerely according to the *logos*. For they say that the pure mind is enabled to see through pious knowledge, and it is also enabled to experience this, becoming that very thing according to the habit through virtue.

For example, that essence is a teacher of theology, through which, seeking the cause of the things that are, we are taught through them that it exists, not attempting to know what this is according to essence, because there is no manifestation in things that are, nor any projection of it, through which we might in any way ascend as if through a caused thing to the Cause; but that motion is indicative of the providence of the things that are, through which, by contemplating the identity—immutable according to essence and likewise unassailable in its course—of each of the things that have come to be, according to its species, we understand the *logos* that contains and preserves all things, which are clearly demarcated from one another by an ineffable union, in accordance with which each is brought into being; and that difference is indicative of judgment, according to which we are taught that God is the wise dispenser of the *logoi* of each individual thing, [drawn] from the natural power of essence in each of the things that are, which is proportionate to the underlying subject. I mean by providence, not the converting and, as it were, economic [providence]—the drawing back of those being provided for from that which ought not to be to that which ought to be—but the sustaining one, which contains the whole and preserves the *logoi* in accordance with which the whole was originally brought into being (149); and by judgment, not that which instructs and, as it were, punishes those who sin, but the saving and defining distribution of the things that are, according to which each of the things that have come to be has an inviolable [connection] to the *logoi* according to which it was made.

^A immutability in its natural identity, even as the Artificer from the beginning judged and established concerning the being, the what-it-is, the how, and the sort of each thing. For indeed, that which is otherwise called providence and judgment are attached to the appetites of our faculty of choice, in many ways restraining us from evil things, wisely turning us toward the good, and by directing those things that are not under our control contrary to those that are, they excise wickedness whether it be present, future, or past. I would not, however, say that this providence differs from that one, or this judgment from that one. For I know one and the same power, but one that exercises a different and manifold efficacy in relation to our affairs. Further, I say that the mixing of things, or their composition, is a symbol of our own purpose. For when this purpose is mixed with virtues, and mixes these into itself, it itself also composes a world that is most worthy of God. I say also that the positioning [of them] is a teacher by which ^B the character, according to purpose, is to be regulated, in such a way that it holds a right opinion concerning what is good, and, by regulating that which ought to oppose, does not receive change, in any way, from the things that would fall away from the foundation according to *logos*. Those who conjoined position with movement and mixing with difference, into essence and difference and movement, have indivisibly distinguished the substance of the universe and its subsistence, and by the *logos* of conception, technically contemplating the Cause in the caused in various ways, have piously grasped that He is and that He is wise and that He is living. And from this they were taught the divinely-perfect and saving *logos* concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, by which they were mystically enlightened not only concerning the ^C *logos* of the mere reason of the being of the Cause, but were also piously initiated into the mode of existence. And again, having surveyed the whole of creation according to position alone, they gathered the aforementioned five modes into three modes of contemplation, acknowledging creation to be a teacher of moral, natural, and theological philosophy from heaven and earth and the things in between, according to the *logos* that is in itself. And again, having contemplated creation from difference alone—that is, from the things containing and the things contained, I mean heaven and the things within it—they reduced the three modes into two, namely wisdom and philosophy: the former as comprehensive and receiving in a way worthy of God all the pious modes which are considered its own, and *enclosing* within itself the mystical and natural *logoi* of the rest; the latter as the one that leads those things grasped—character and purpose, action and contemplation, virtue and knowledge—by a relative familiarity back to wisdom as to their cause. And again, having contemplated creation according to the mixing alone—that is, the equable composition of the universe—and looking at the ^D whole through all the things that are ineffably bound together to the fulfillment of one world, they alone acknowledged the Maker as the one who binds and fastens the parts to the whole and to each other.

^A Recognizing the principle of these two, they enclosed them into one mode of contemplation, according to which, by a simple approach, they ferried the mind through the principles that are in existing things toward the Cause, and by binding them to Him alone as the gatherer and attractor of all things derived from Him, they were no longer dispersed among the individual things of the whole by the surpassing principles. Through having been clearly persuaded that God alone is properly the cause of all that exists—from the precise contemplation of existing things—and the cause of the essence of beings, and their movement, and the clear distinction of those that differ, and the indissoluble bond of those that are mixed, and the immovable foundation of those that are placed, and, simply put, of every substance, movement, difference, mixture, and position that is in any way conceived, they wisely transferred, through a suitable resemblance, the mystical contemplation of the sensible age to the world completed in the Spirit through the virtues. ^B According to these mentioned ways, having gathered into one the substance of the intelligible world—which is completed through the various forms of the virtues—they impressed it within themselves, as far as was possible, having passed through all the principles of beings and even the principles of the virtues themselves, or rather, having ascended unknowingly with these toward the One who is beyond them, and toward the principle in whom these have their being, and who is super-essential and super-good. And having become, as far as possible, entirely one with the whole, according to the natural power in them, they were so possessed by Him as to be known by Him alone, like most transparent mirrors, holding the form of the entire Word of God who contemplates them, appearing unfailingly through His divine marks, with none of the ancient characters that are accustomed to indicate the human element remaining, as all yielded to the better ones, like dark air transformed entirely into light.

Contemplation on Melchizedek

^C This, I believe, the admirable and great Melchizedek knew and experienced—he of whom the divine word in the Scriptures narrates great and wondrous things—that he was deemed worthy to transcend time and nature, and to be likened to the Son of God. He became—insofar as it was possible for him to become such by grace—what the Giver of grace himself is believed to be in essence. For that he is said to be "without father, without mother, without genealogy" ^D signifies nothing else, I think, than the perfect laying aside of natural marks, which happened to him through the supreme grace granted for his virtue. But that he "has neither beginning of days nor end of life" refers to the knowledge that circumscribes all time and the age, and the contemplation of every material and immaterial substance.

^A And the phrase, "But having been made like unto the Son of God, he abideth a priest continually," perhaps manifests that he is able to keep the intellectual eye of virtue—which is most Christ-like and divine—and of the contemplation that is turned toward God, sleepless and unchanging until the end. For virtue is naturally accustomed to struggle [against nature], and true contemplation [struggles] against time and the age, so that the former may remain free from slavery to all things believed to exist after God, and insurmountable, as though it were the only one that knows God as the begetter; and so that the latter may be uncircumscribed, remaining in none of the things that have an end or a beginning, as it images through itself God, who defines every beginning and end, and draws toward Himself, by an ineffable ecstasy, every intellection of those who understand. From these things the divine likeness is demonstrated—by which I mean [the likeness of] knowledge and virtue—and through which the unshakeable love for God alone is preserved for the worthy, according to which the dignity of adoption, as befits God, grants them the grace to approach God and to be with Him continually, a dignity which exhibits the divine likeness itself to the supplication of the one who approaches.

Whence I reasonably suppose that he [Melchizedek] should not be named by the time and nature under which the great Melchizedek naturally ended, and which he had already overcome by life and reason and utterly abandoned—the divine Word having justified him [by these things]—but rather he should be named by the things from which and through which he regenerated his own soul and will, that is, by virtue and knowledge. For in these things the will struggled earnestly through the virtues against the law of nature, with which the war is very difficult, and the intellect flies over the property of time and the age through ^B the knowledge of an unpolluted mind; and it is not right to attribute to these men the property of those things that were left behind as a mark, but rather the magnificence of those things that were assumed, from which and in which alone they hereafter exist and are known.

Indeed, we ourselves also naturally, falling upon visible things, designate and name bodies from their colors, as for instance [we name] light the air that is illuminated by light, and fire the material of any kind that is ignited by fire, and white the body that has been whitened, and all other things of this kind. If, then, he preferred virtue through choice over nature and all things according to it, through the fair election of the dignity that is within us, and surpassed all time and age through knowledge, having made all things that are after God gnostically behind himself according to contemplation, and having remained in none of the existing things in which any limit whatsoever is observed, the divine Melchizedek—being generated in the Spirit by grace through the Word unto the divine, beginningless, and immortal [essences] of God—bears within himself the safe and true likeness of the God who begat him (since every birth is naturally accustomed to produce ^C something similar to the one who begets: "For that which is born," he says, "of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Joan. iii, 6)), it follows that he is not [to be described] by the natural and temporal properties whereby father and mother and genea—

genealogy, and beginning and end of days are contained, which he had already utterly discarded, but was named from the divine and blessed characteristics by which he transformed his own form, [(152 a)] which neither time, nor nature, nor reason, nor mind, nor anything else that can be named among existing things, can reach. Therefore, the great Melchizedek is written down as “without father, and without mother, and without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life,” as the true discourse of the God-bearing men concerning him explains, not because of a nature which is created and out of nothing—according to which something had its beginning of being and ceased—but because of the divine and uncreated grace, which is always above all nature and all time, from the ever-existing God, according to which he is acknowledged, by will and mind alone, as being entirely born of the Whole.

He alone, being this, has been preserved in Scripture, as perhaps the first to have become, by virtue, above matter and form, which can be signified by the [terms] "without father and without mother and without genealogy," and as one who has passed beyond—in knowledge—all those things subject to time and age, whose being began in time—not denying that they *once were*—nor having stumbled at all in the divine path of the mind which signifies, perhaps, what it means to have “neither beginning of days nor end of life.” And [he is preserved] as one who has, in an exceptional, hidden, and silent manner, and to speak concisely, in an unknown manner, after the removal of all the things that exist by the mind, entered into God Himself, and having been totally qualified and transformed by the Whole, which that which says, “But He remains a priest unto eternity, being made like unto the Son of God,” can intimate. For every one of the saints, according to whatever good quality he might have possessed in an exceptional degree, is proclaimed accordingly a type of God, the Giver of the good. According to which meaning, this great Melchizedek also, because of the divine virtue implanted in him, has been judged worthy to be an image of Christ, God, and of His ineffable mysteries, into whom all the saints are gathered as into an archetype and the cause of the semblance of good in each of them, but especially this one, inasmuch as he bore in himself the representations of Christ [more] than all the others. [(152 b)]

Explanation concerning the Lord, regarding what is said of Melchizedek.

For the Lord and God our Jesus Christ alone, by nature and in truth, is without father and without mother and without genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life. Without mother, because of the immaterial and incorporeal and utterly unknown nature of his eternal birth from the Father above; without father, according to the lower and temporal birth from the mother and his bodily generation, the form of which—by way of seed—he did not follow in the conception; and without genealogy, as ^D

^A regarding the manner of both his births, it is altogether untrodden and incomprehensible to all. But that he has neither beginning of days nor end of life, as one without beginning, endless, and altogether infinite, being by nature God, he remains a priest forever, in that he does not cease to exist by any death of wickedness or of nature, being God and the provider of life according to nature and virtue for all. And do not think that anyone is devoid of this grace, just because the discourse defined it as belonging only to the great Melchizedek. 153 For God has perhaps naturally implanted in everyone the power for obtaining salvation, so that everyone who wishes may be able to partake of the divine grace. And if one wishes to become a Melchizedek, or an Abraham, or a Moses, and simply to transfer all the saints into himself, he is not hindered—not by changing names and places, but by imitating ways and conduct.

Another contemplation on Melchizedek.

Whoever, therefore, has mortified the members that are upon the earth, and has extinguished the whole reasoning of his own flesh, ^B and has shaken off the relation toward it by which the love that is owed by us to God alone is divided, and has denied all the marks of the flesh and of the world for the sake of the divine grace, to the extent that he can also say with the blessed Apostle Paul, "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?" and what follows—such a one has become without father, without mother, and without genealogy, according to the great Melchizedek, not having how he might be held by flesh and nature, because of the union that has come about with the Spirit.

Contemplation on the fact that he has neither beginning of days nor end of life.

If, moreover, he has also denied himself, having lost his own soul for my sake, he will find it, ^C that is, by having cast aside the present life with its own desires for the sake of the better one, he possesses living and effective the Word of God, which penetrates by virtue and knowledge even to the division of soul and spirit, and he has nothing at all that is devoid of His presence. He has become both without beginning and without end, no longer bearing in himself a life moved by time—which has a beginning and an end and is stirred by many passions—but only the divine, eternal life of the indwelling Word, terminated by no death.

Contemplation on the text, "He remains a priest forever."

If, however, with great attention he knows how to be vigilant over his own gift, and through action and contemplation ^D has made it his concern to care for the goods that are above nature and time, he has become...

^A a perpetual and eternal priest, intellectually always enjoying divine communion; and because, by imitating the constancy of the will regarding the Good, he emulates that constancy which is natural, he is not prevented, in the Jewish manner, from persevering perpetually in the death of sin, and offering the sacrifice of praise and confession, gloriously theologizing [God] as Creator of all, and gratefully giving thanks as to the provident and just Judge of all, upon the divine altar of the mind, from which those who serve the Tabernacle have no right to eat. For it is impossible for those who walk only by the letter, and who are content with the sacrifices of irrational passions for their own salvation, to partake of the mystical bread of divine knowledge and the life-giving cup of Wisdom, declaring the death of Jesus through the cessation from sin, but ^B denying his resurrection—for the sake of which and because of which the death has occurred—through the contemplation of the intellect, which is illumined by the justice of good works. And though they are very ready, willingly, to be mortified in the flesh, they do not even begin to be made alive in the Spirit, as long as their tabernacle still stands, since the way—which is the Word of God, who said, “I am the way” (John 14:6)—has not yet been shown to them through reason and the knowledge of the saints; and after they have known the Lord as flesh through practical philosophy, they do not desire to attain through contemplation the glory which is the Only-Begotten’s from the Father, “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

Contemplation on Abraham.

^C Abraham again becomes spiritual, departing from his land, his kin, and his father’s house, and coming into the land which God showed him, having shown [the force of] the flesh according to habit, and having become outside of it through the divorce of the passions, having left the senses behind and no longer receiving through them any wandering of sin, and having passed beyond all sensible things, from which there arises for the soul—by means of the senses—deception and error; and, coming with the mind alone, free from every material bond, into the divine and blessed land of knowledge, and mystically traversing it in length and breadth, in which he will find our Lord and God Jesus Christ, the good inheritance of those who fear him—[Christ,] who is proclaimed for his own sake, ^D as regards his incomparable length, by those worthy, in so far as is possible for men to speak of God; but for our sake is glorified in breadth, through his all-wise providence which encompasses all, and through that most wondrous and ineffable economy for our sake, having become a partaker of those ways by which he was taught how to honor the Lord, both actively and contemplatively, through which friendship and assimilation to God are firmly established. And to speak of these things briefly: he who has actively vanquished the flesh and the sense and the world, concerning which the mind’s relative distraction toward intelligible things occurs,

^A becoming another Abraham by this same grace, appears possessing the same character of virtue and knowledge as the patriarch.

Contemplation on Moses

of the material, which forcefully separates that freedom, striving to overcome the power that tries to make free [what is] slave, ^A far surpassing it in strength.

Another brief contemplation on the same.

And to speak concisely: he who has not submitted to the yoke of sin, nor suffocated himself in the muddy torrent of the passions through evil desire, nor suffered himself to be nourished by the spring of pleasure, but rather has slain the mindset of the flesh, which tyrannizes the nobility of the soul, and, having become superior to all corruptible things, has fled this wandering world as a kind of Egypt, which distresses the most discerning mind with bodily cares, and in quiet has come to be with himself, and in studious leisure has been ineffably taught by the wise dispensation of divine Providence, which divinely governs and cares for the whole, through expert contemplation of beings, and from there, through mystical theology—which is credited ^B to a pure mind alone through prayer, being ineffably united with God as if in a cloud of ignorance—has inscribed within himself, according to the mind, the precepts of piety, and outwardly, like Moses the tablets, the graces of the virtues with the finger of God, that is, the Holy Spirit; or, to speak in the words of Scripture, he who prefers to be mistreated with the people of God [(156 ɑ)] rather than to have the temporary enjoyment of sin, and who, judging the reproach of Christ to be more precious than the treasures of Egypt—that is, than wealth and glory, which are temporary and subject to destruction—has chosen to undergo sufferings for the sake of virtue willingly and gladly, he has become a spiritual Moses, not conversing with a visible Pharaoh, ^C but intellectually warring with the invisible tyrant and slayer of souls and prince of malice, the devil, and with the evil powers that accompany him, using the staff he carries in his hand—I mean the power of the Word according to the active [life].

Contemplation on the following: How one is able to imitate the saints who were before the law and after the law, and what is the identity of the natural law and the written law according to their transition into each other.

Similarly, each of us who desires to can also transfer all the saints into himself, by spiritually forming himself toward each one of them from those things that have been written typically in historical records concerning them (for the divine Apostle says, "These things happened to them typically, ^D but they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come"). Regarding the saints of old before the law: by piously acquiring the knowledge of God from the creation of the world, and by learning to practice the virtues from Providence, which wisely manages the whole, he [forms himself] according to those same saints before the law, who through all things naturally inscribed in themselves the law written in the Spirit...

^A and as examples of piety and virtue, they are deservedly set before those under the law (for, he says, "Look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who bore you"). Indeed, for those who lived according to the law, while he is advanced by pious reflection through the commandments into the knowledge of God proclaimed in them, and is adorned by the appropriate modes of virtue through noble action, and is instructed that the natural law is the same as the written law—when it is wisely varied through symbols in action, and conversely, when the written is [seen as] the same as the natural, when it becomes simple, uniform, and free from symbols in those worthy of virtue and knowledge through reason and contemplation—he is led to the image of those saints themselves recounted in the Holy Books, who, by removing the letter as it were a veil from the Spirit, appeared using the natural law ^B spiritually.

That the saints under the law, spiritually receiving the law, foresaw the grace manifested through it.

For all of them explicitly, as they looked forward to a worship other than the legal one, predicted the consummation of the God-befitting life that was to appear according to it, which is appropriate and most natural to it, since they needed nothing external for perfection, as is clearly established for all who are not ignorant of the divine oracles of the Law and the Prophets. This is what David and Hezekiah, in particular, indicated by their own way of acting and conversing with others, one indeed propitiating God legally for sin and obtaining forgiveness, the other being honored by God with an addition of life by a decree beyond the law ^C.

That he who follows Christ sincerely through the virtues also transcends the law, both written and natural.

However, nothing prevents, as I think, one who has been pre-educated by these laws—the natural, I say, and the written—and established to merit the love or approval of God, and who, beyond these, through sincere faith alone, has faithfully followed that reason which leads to the highest good—and who has conceived in his mind no wicked deed or intention or thought, to which the nature and knowledge of all things, existing in whatever way the substance of what is thought and what is, is subject and appears—from being able to be imbued, as is fitting for one who has sincerely resolved to follow Jesus who has passed through the heavens, with the true knowledge of things as far as it is possible for man, by the demonstration of divine light, to receive it ^D.

Contemplation of the manner by which he who has in all things obeyed God transcends both the natural and the written law.

^A For if the whole nature of beings is divided into those things which are intelligible and those which are sensible, and the former are called and are eternal, as having taken the beginning of their existence in eternity, while the others are temporal, as being made in time; and if the former fall under the intellect, while the latter fall under the senses, because of the indissoluble power of the natural relative property that binds these to one another (for there is a great relation of the intelligible to those who understand, and of the sensible to those who sense, and man, consisting of soul and body, is, through the natural relation and property of the alternating movement toward each of the parts of creation, both circumscribed and circumscribes, the former by essence, the latter by power, ^B as if divided into parts of himself relative to these, and as if drawing these together into himself through his own parts by union; for he is circumscribed by the intelligible and sensible, inasmuch as he is soul and body, and he is naturally fitted to circumscribe these by power, inasmuch as he is understanding and sensing; but God simply and infinitely is above all beings, both those that contain and those that are contained, and the very nature of those things without which these [beings] do not exist—I speak of time and eternity and place, by which the whole universe is enclosed—as being entirely unrelated to all things): ^C therefore, he who has prudently discerned how one must love God, who surpasses reason and knowledge and is entirely free from any relation whatsoever and from any nature, will pass beyond all sensible and intelligible things, and all time and eternity and place, without any relation; and finally, stripping himself entirely of every exercise of sense, reason, and intellect, he will attain, in an ineffable and incomprehensible manner, the divine delight which surpasses word and intellect, according to the mode and reason known to God who gives such grace and to those who have been deemed worthy to receive it from God, carrying with him no longer anything natural or written, after all things that could be spoken or known have been completely surpassed and sealed in silence.

Contemplation on the passage of the Gospel concerning the man who fell among thieves.

^D And perhaps this is the expenditure given to the one commanded by the Lord to take care of him who had fallen among thieves, in the two denarii at the inn, which the Lord also promised freely that He would repay on His return: it is the absolute renunciation by faith of the things that are, in those who are perfect (for the Lord says: "Whoever does not renounce all his own possessions, cannot be my disciple"), according to which he who takes all things from himself, or rather himself from all things—to speak more precisely—having become a lover of wisdom, shall merit to dwell with God alone.

^A For those who have received that adoption which was evangelically demonstrated, according to the holy and blessed apostles—who, having stripped themselves of everything they possessed entirely, and having cleaved to God and the Word alone through all things, said, "Lo, we have left all and followed Thee"—having acquired the Creator of nature himself, and the Giver of the assistance according to the Law, and the Lord, evidently as the only light of truth in place of the Law and of nature, they have reasonably received the unerring knowledge of all things that are after God. For the knowledge of things made by Him is naturally accustomed to be revealed together with Him. Just as when the perceptible sun rises, all bodies are clearly revealed together with it, so also God, the intelligible Sun of righteousness, rising upon the mind—as He himself knows how to be comprehended by the creation—wills that the true principles of all things, both intelligible and sensible, be revealed together with Himself. And the bright manifestation of the garments of the Lord, which shone with the splendor of His face on the mount of Transfiguration, signifies this, reconciling for the mind, as I think, the knowledge of things that are after Him and around Him by means of God. For neither can the sensible eye perceive anything without light, nor can the mind receive spiritual contemplation without the knowledge of God. For there, to the sight, light grants the perception of visible things; and here, to the mind, the science of God grants the knowledge of the intelligible. ^B

Contemplation of the manner in which Adam's transgression occurred.

^C Naturally, the forefather Adam, not having fixed the eye of his soul upon this divine light, like a blind man in the darkness of ignorance, willfully reaching out with both hands for the dross of matter, inclined himself entirely to sense alone and surrendered himself to it. Through it, having received the deadly venom of the most bitter beast, he did not even enjoy the fruit of the sense as he had intended, while he strove to possess the things of God illicitly—outside of God, and before God, and not according to God—which was impossible to do. For having accepted the sense which took the serpent rather than God as its counselor, and having tasted of the forbidden tree, of whose fruit he had already been taught that it was deadly, he exchanged the life equivalent to the fruit, having created for himself in every moment of the present time a living death. For if death is the ruin of generation, and the body which is naturally built up by the influx of food is always being corrupted, evaporating in a flux, then Adam always preserved death for himself and for us by the very things through which he trusted that life was flourishing. Whereas, if he had obeyed God rather than his consort and had nourished himself from the tree of life, he would not have laid aside the immortality given to him, but would have continued to be nourished by the communication of life—inasmuch as every life is preserved by its own proper and suitable nourishment. Moreover, the nourishment of that blessed life ^D

^A is the bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world, as the truthful Word himself declared concerning himself in the Gospels. Because the first man was unwilling to be nourished by this, he naturally fell away from the divine life and laid hold of another, the parent of death, according to which he took upon himself an irrational form, obscured the ineffable beauty of the divine, and surrendered his whole nature as food for death. Through this, death lives throughout the entire span of this temporal interval, making us his food, while we never truly live, being eternally devoured by him through corruption.

That the saints were taught that there is another life, true and divine and eternally unchanging, following upon the unstable, revolving course of the present life.

^B The saints, having wisely perceived that the life currently given to men by God is sluggish and fleeting—and, as is reasonable, having been taught that this is not [truly] that life, but that there is another, divine and unchanging, which they supposed that God, being good, must primarily have created in a manner befitting Himself—were mystically instructed. By means of wisdom, according to the grace of the Spirit, as far as it is possible for men subject to death, they turned the eye of their soul upward. Having intimately received the desire for His divine life, they reasonably judged that this present life must be laid aside if they wished to attain that other one purely and as reason requires. ^C And since the laying aside of life does not occur without death, they considered the death of this [life] to be the casting off of the love for the flesh, through which the entry of death into life occurred, so that by devising death for death, they might put an end to death for the sake of life. By dying the precious death before the Lord—the death that is truly the death of death—that which can destroy corruption and open the way to blessed life and immortality for the worthy, they [achieved this]. For I do not think it right to call the end of this present life "death," but rather the dissolution of death, the departure of destruction, the liberation from slavery, the calming of turbulence, the removal of wars, the passing of confusion, the retreat of darkness, the relaxation of toils, the silence of confused noise, the stillness of the turmoil, the veiling of shame, the flight from the passions, the abolition of sin, and, to sum it up in one word, the circumscription and extermination of all evils. ^D Having accomplished these things through voluntary mortification, the saints presented themselves as guests and pilgrims to this life. For, fighting valiantly against the world and the body and the seditions born of them, and strangling the deception that arises from the collision of the senses with sensible objects, they preserved the authority and dignity of their soul for themselves, free and unenslaved, as was altogether fitting; for they judged it consistent and just that the worse should be driven out by the better, rather than that the better should be led by the worse.

in bonds. This law is indeed divine and implanted in those who have chosen a way of life primarily loved by rational beings—a way of life which, through its frugality, imitates the self-sufficiency and tranquility of the angels. ^A

That the saints did not use contemplation or initiation through the holy Scriptures in the same way we do.

But let us return in order to the points we examined before, and add the remainder concerning the [transfiguration], as far as we are able, so that the perfection of the saints in all things and their genuine freedom—inclined neither to the flesh nor to matter—may be viewed; and so that it may be seen that they, unlike us, did not contemplate either the creation or the holy Scripture in a material and groveling way—using merely sense, appearances, and figures to acquire the blessed knowledge of God, and relying on letters and syllables, from which it happens that one stumbles and is deceived regarding the judgment of truth—but rather with a mind alone most pure and freed from all material darkness. For if we wish to use religious judgment in examining the reasons of sensible things intellectually, we shall see them, as they proceed by a straight path, ^B to a firm knowledge of God and divine things.

A more extensive contemplation on the transfiguration

It had been said, therefore, above, that through the light-like radiance of the Lord’s face which occurred on the mountain, the thrice-blessed apostles were, in an ineffable and unknown manner, mystically led toward the power and glory of God—which is completely imperceptible to all beings—being taught that the light which appeared to their senses was a symbol of the mystery hidden in obscurity. For just as here the ray of light that shone forth overcomes the keenness of the eyes and remains ungraspable to them, so too there, God surpasses every power and faculty of the mind, ^C and while He is seen, He does not permit the one who ventures to behold Him to grasp any image whatsoever. But through the white garments, they learned together and as one, in a manner appropriate to God, the magnificence of the creatures in proportion to the reasons according to which they were made, and the mystery signified in the words of holy Scripture; for by the knowledge of God, the power of the letters according to the Spirit is revealed simultaneously with the wisdom and knowledge concerning the things that were created, through which He Himself is again appropriately manifested. But through Moses and Elijah who were standing on either side of Him—for this remains for the examination of our contemplation—they received, through true contemplation, ^D many gnostic ways corresponding to the many thoughts of those whose images had been set forth in the mysteries.

Contemplation on Moses and Elijah

^A I. And first, they received the most pious understanding that the legal and prophetic word must necessarily be in harmony with the Word and God, through Moses and Elijah, inasmuch as they both exist from Him and concerning Him, proclaim Him, and are established around Him.

^B II. Then, they learned through the same figures that wisdom and kindness belong to Him: the former, because through it the Word is prescriptive regarding what must be done and prohibitive regarding what must not be done—of which Moses was the type (for we believe the grace of legislation belongs to wisdom); the latter, because through it He exhorts and turns men toward the divine life if they have slipped away from it—of which Elijah was the type, manifesting through himself the whole of the prophetic gift. For a characteristic mark of divine kindness is the return of the erring with philanthropy, of which we know the prophets to be the heralds.

^C III. Or [they also learned] of knowledge and instruction: the one, because it provides men with the discernment of good and evil. "For I have set before your face," He says, "life and death," [Deut. xxx, 19] so that one might choose the former and avoid the latter, and not—from ignorance—fall into the worse instead of the good; which Moses is declared to have done, prefiguring in himself the symbols of the truth. The other concerns those who indiscriminately use opposites, according to the example of Israel, of whom the great Elijah became the instructor; for it [wisdom/knowledge] acts as a chastisement against the indifference of those who mix the unmixable without distinction, and leads the foolishness and hardness of those who have surrendered themselves entirely to evil toward wisdom, as toward reason and sensory perception.

^D IV. Or [they learned of] action and contemplation: the former, as that which destroys wickedness and, through the demonstration of virtues, cuts off from the world those who are led by it entirely according to their disposition, just as Moses led Israel out of Egypt and taught them to be led obediently by the divine laws of the Spirit. The latter, as that which carries one away from matter and form, just as the fiery chariot carried away Elijah, and leads and joins one to God through knowledge, so that they are not burdened at all by the flesh, either through the rejection of the law that follows upon it, or by being inflamed with any pride over their correct actions, due to the dew of the poverty of the spirit that is joined to the true virtues.

V. Or again, they were taught through the Word the mysteries concerning marriage and celibacy, by means of Moses, whom marriage did not prevent from becoming a lover of the divine glory, and by means of Elijah, who remained completely free from marital union. This is because the Word and God proclaims that He mystically adopts for Himself those who direct these things according to reason, in accordance with the laws divinely established concerning them.

VI. Or [finally], they were fully persuaded through the same [figures] that the Word is truly the Lord of life and death.

VII. They learned through the same [figures] that all live to God and that no one is at all dead to Him, except the one who has consigned himself to death by sin and has severed himself from the Word by a voluntary inclination toward passions and vices.

VIII. Furthermore, they were instructed that all things—whether of the legal or the prophetic work—are to be referred to the Word, as He is the truth; that they exist as images of the mysteries; and that they are gathered into Him as their beginning and end.

IX. And [they were instructed] that all things which are after God and have been created out of God—that is, the nature of beings and time—appear as existing with God, their Cause and Maker, who Himself truly appears [to us] as far as it is possible for this to be. Of time, indeed, Moses appears to be the image—not only as the teacher of time and of the numbering according to it (for he was the first to number the time following the creation of the world) and as the guide of temporal worship, but also as one who did not enter into the rest along with those to whom he had preached [the Gospel] before the coming of the divine Gospel. ^B For time also is such; it neither anticipates nor meets in its motion those whom it is by nature intended to transmit to the divine life of the coming age. For it has as its successor Jesus, who is the Lord of all time and eternity; although the reasons for time remain otherwise in God, as the entry into the land of promise, given by Moses in the desert to those who received the land, mystically manifests. For eternity is time when it has ceased from motion, and time is eternity when it is measured as it is carried along by motion—so that eternity is, to define it, time deprived of motion, and time is eternity measured by motion. And Elias may be perceived as the image of nature, not only because he kept inviolate the reasons [of nature] and the prudence of his will and counsel regarding them, free from every vicissitude of passion, ^C but also because, as a kind of natural law, he chastises in judgment those who use their nature contrary to nature. For nature is also of such a kind; it chastises those who attempt to corrupt it to the extent that they apply themselves to an unnatural mode of living, for it does not allow them to exercise the full power of the nature itself in a natural way, [they being] already diminished in integrity and for this reason chastised—inasmuch as they, ill-advisedly and imprudently inclining toward what is not, provide a defect of existence for themselves.

X. If one were to say that the intellectual and sensual condition of the Creator Word is contained by Moses and Elias, he would perhaps not stray from the truth. ^D Of these, Moses holds the [symbolic] reason of the sensual [condition], as he is subject to generation and decay, just as his history narrates, commemorating his birth and his death. For such also is the sensual creation, having a known beginning of generation,

even if it has indeed come to be and began, and was brought from non-being into existence, nor does it look forward to a known end of existence through decay. For it possesses incorruptibility naturally, having received it from God, who willed that it be created in this way. ^A

Another concise contemplation on the Transfiguration.

That the Lord also became a type of Himself according to His economy through the flesh.

for one to 163 ^B be unversed in the demonstrations provided through the flesh, to announce the divine powers to men in a manner consistent with the love of God.

Contemplation of the shining face of the Lord.

The radiance, therefore, of the Lord’s face—which surpasses human beatitude—is, for the apostles, the mystic negation of the nature of Christ God, in which the blessed and holy Divinity is, according to essence, more than ineffable and more than unknown, and is infinitely exalted above all infinity, leaving no trace, not even a tenuous one, of comprehension to those who follow after It, nor does It grant to any of those that are, an understanding of how the same [Being] is both Unity and Trinity, since it is not the nature of the creature to contain the Uncreated, nor is it possible for the infinite to be grasped by the thoughts of the finite.

Contemplation of the luminous garments of the Lord.

I suspect that the affirmative mode is divided into active providence and judgment; first, that which is active—which bids us deduce from the beauty and magnitude of creatures that God is the Artificer of all things—is manifested through the shining garments of the Lord, which the Word, having anticipated in the visible creatures that were brought forth, demonstrated.

Another contemplation on Moses.

I suspect that the mode of providence is signified through Moses, as it mercifully delivers those who have been caught in wickedness from error, and wisely distinguishes for men the modes of departure toward divine, immaterial, and incorporeal things, away from material, corruptible, and bodily things, and prudently supports them with divine laws. ^C

Another contemplation on Elijah.

I suspect that the mode of judgment is signified through Elijah, as it punishes some according to merit by both word and deed, and pursues others, in such a way that the attribute is assigned to each according to the underlying matter and the quality of virtue or wickedness. For all these things—which we have been investigating regarding the present passage of sacred Scripture—Moses and Elijah performed, as far as was possible for those who typified divine things through their own circumstances, each in the times in which he lived, as is narrated; and these things coincide with what we have set forth according to the mode of contemplation.

Contemplation of the conversation of Moses and Elijah with the Lord during the transfiguration.

From their conversation with the Lord, and that which [is according to] Matt. XVII, 2.

^A the departure which he was to fulfill in Jerusalem, they were not only instructed concerning the outcome of the mysteries regarding him which had been proclaimed by the Law and the prophets, but perhaps also concerning the fact that no one at all among all things that exist could grasp the end of God’s hidden will concerning the All and of His divine dispensations, except for His great providence and judgment, through which everything proceeds in an orderly fashion toward the end foreknown to God alone. What this end is, finally, and how and of what kind and when it will be, all were equally ignorant, and only the saints, having cleansed their souls with virtues and having inclined their entire intellectual leaning toward divine things, truly and solely recognized that it would come to pass. They had, so to speak, inclined their entire mind away from the universal nature of visible things—through which it is the nature of the present order to be constituted—and, as if shouting it out clearly, they heard of its end.

Natural contemplation concerning the necessity of the world having an end.

For having surveyed with as much knowledge as possible the present world, and having wisely unraveled the closely woven logic of the bodies variously conjoined with one another within it, they found that some of them are sensory, some perceptive, and some universal, while all things are contained by and turned about into all things through the alteration of the specific property surrounding each one. ^B For sensible things are naturally contained by the perceptive, and sensible things are contained by the perceptive through sensation, as things to be perceived. And again, the universals are corrupted by being turned into the particulars through alteration, and the particulars are corrupted by being turned into the universals through dissolution. And for the former, destruction occurs through the generation of the others. For the mutual gathering of the particulars among themselves, which produces their generation, is the destruction of each of them by alteration; and conversely, the resolution of the particulars by the dissolution of their bond toward the universals, which introduces destruction, is the endurance and generation of the universals. ^C And having learned that this is the constitution of the sensible world—the mutual destruction and alteration of the bodies within it, from which and in which it subsists—they were consequently taught, through the property of the bodies of which it is constituted, which is by nature fickle and alterable and is carried about and turned in one way and then another, [165 a] that it is not possible for its necessary fulfillment, which is to come in a fixed order, to be fixed, nor can one speak of anything as eternal that is not always the same, without change and without whatever alteration, but is scattered and turned about in countless ways, as they rightly reasoned.

Brief contemplation concerning the age to come, and what the chasm is that exists between God and men, and who Lazarus is and the patriarch's bosom.

Hence, having magnificently transcended the things that are seen... ^D

and having reached the limit of that which is to be, in which nothing of things that exist is any longer borne or bearing, nor is there any motion of anything at all that defines the impetuous movement of His ineffable stability, which defines the motion and the impetus of things that are borne and moved. Desiring to attain this in their minds while still clothed in this corruptible flesh, they wisely crossed the chasm that lies between God and men, voluntarily stripping themselves of their relation to the flesh and the world. For the chasm that is truly terrible and great between God and men is the affection and disposition toward the body and this world. Lazarus, having bravely and joyfully embraced the deprivation of these—as his illness and poverty indicate, the one making him an alien to the world, the other to the body—was held worthy to receive rest in the bosom of Abraham ^B, leaving the rich man, who had clung entirely to them, outside the refreshment, without any other fruit of the life lived in the flesh except that he is eternally punished on its account; for he neither enjoyed the present life, which he desired and loved alone—though it cannot naturally be held because it is in a state of flux—nor was he able to partake of the future life, to which he had remained utterly idle and indifferent, it being for those alone who have entirely loved it and who, for the desire of it, have willingly and with pleasure endured all painful things. We understand by the bosom of Abraham God, who appeared to us carnally from the seed of Abraham, as ^C the provider of every good thing to all those worthy of grace, according to the quality and quantity of the virtue of each, distributing himself, as it were, into different gifts, yet distributing himself as an undivided whole, and yet in such a way that he is not at all divided with those who partake of him, on account of the naturally indivisible essence of his unity, and, conversely, on account of the disparate dignity of those who participate, appearing miraculously through the participation in an ineffable union (the discursive reason knows this). No one can penetrate to him who rejoices in the pleasure of the flesh and is delighted more by the deception of the world than by his blessed glory, nor will one who has been defeated by the world ^D stand with the one who has conquered the world, but will be wretched and prudently exiled from it. For divine justice has not deemed it right that those who in this life honor things human, pride themselves on wealth and bodily health and other such titles, and place blessedness in these alone, while valuing the goods of the soul as nothing, should partake of those divine and eternal goods for which they felt no concern at all, because of their excessive devotion to material things, ignorant of how much the virtues excel wealth, health, and other transitory goods.

Contemplation on the Virtues

For the virtues alone—even if others accompany them—make a man blessed: with others, according to

^A what one of the sages of divine things said, but solely and by themselves, according to definition. For of existing things, some are understood by definition, as "a two-cubit length," and others by breadth, as "a heap." For if you take two measures from a heap, what remains is still a heap; and if you remove from that beatitude of breadth the goods of the body and external things, and leave only the virtues, the beatitude remains nonetheless undiminished. For virtue alone, even by itself, is sufficient for the one who possesses it to attain blessedness. Therefore, every evil man is miserable, even if he possesses all the so-called goods of the earth together, if he is deprived of the virtues; and every good man is blessed, even if he is deprived of all earthly goods, possess- ^B ing the splendor of virtue, with which Lazarus, having rest in the bosom of Abraham, rejoices.

Another contemplation on the text: "If you are crucified as a thief."

But if, on the other hand, a thief is "well-minded" who is deemed worthy to be crucified with Christ through the complete and entire expulsion of the passions, and is crucified on His right hand—that is, running through every virtue with reason and knowledge, and keeping his life inoffensive and harmless to all people, and having no movement at all that is discordant with the mildness of the Word due to harshness—then he is a thief who is "ill-minded" who, for the sake of glory or greater gains, hypocritically feigns a life according to virtue by specious means, and for the sake of reputation, instead of all virtue and ^C knowledge, employs one and only one word that is flattering to those outside, while being crooked in mind and altogether harsh towards those familiar with him, and whom one must, in his grave blasphemy of the way of God, skillfully reprimand and restrain. For perhaps he will cease to slander the Word through his own conduct, admonished by the correction of the one rebuking him, just as occurred on the cross to that thief who had impudently brought forth blasphemy. For the fact that he did not respond to the one rebuking him signifies by this silence the approval of the word spoken. By whatever manner, then, of these mentioned, we are crucified with Christ, let us be eager, even as we are here, to appease the Word who is crucified with us, and to receive the truthful promise ^D of rest, which has been cleansed in conscience by the thoughts that censure it, if indeed "today signifies the present day of this age (For "Today," He says, "you will be with Me in paradise"), while "tomorrow" signifies that of the future age, in which you ought to expect no remission of sins, but only the fitting requital for each person according to the merit of their life.

Another contemplation for those who are in doubt concerning the saying of the one who spoke in the discourse on the Dedication: "Sublimer than the sublime, and more admirable than the admirable."

^A And again: the first Sunday is a symbol of the future natural resurrection and incorruption, while the second bears the image of the divinization that will come to us by grace. For if the enjoyment of goods from a habit pure and free of evils is more precious than a habit of evil, and the habit of perfection according to true knowledge is more precious than a healthy moral choice through virtue, and the transformation toward God in grace by way of divinization is more precious than natural incorruption—of which the first Sunday bears the type, while the second happens to be the symbol—it is with good reason that the master, brought by the Spirit to a height beyond the sublime, called the new [Sunday] the Sunday.

Natural contemplation, through which the saints learned of God from the things created.

Thus, therefore, the saints, by contemplating the creation, its good order, its proportion, and the service that each individual thing provides to the whole, and how all things are wisely and providently constituted according to the principle by which they were created, and how it is impossible for the things that have been made to be in a better state than they now are—seeing that they need neither addition nor subtraction in order to be in a better state—learned of the Creator from his works. ^C And, furthermore, by contemplating the permanence, the order, and the positioning of the things that have been made, and the arrangement according to which all things stand, each in its own proper species, unconfused and free from every turmoil; and the movement of the stars proceeding always in the same manner, never at all differing; and the cycle of the year completing itself in beautiful order according to the restitution of these same things from the same place to the same place; and the balance of the nights and the days throughout the year, while each in turn increases and decreases without either an increase or a decrease of measure occurring to them by any greater or smaller amount—by these they understood that there is a Provider of all things, and they acknowledged Him to be both God and the Creator of the universe.

Natural contemplation concerning the fact that the world has a beginning and an end, and everything else that is after God.

For who, upon beholding the beauty and the magnitude of the things created by God, will not immediately perceive Him to be the producer of their generation, as the beginning and cause of beings and their Maker? Who will not recur in his intellect to Him alone, leaving these inferior things behind? And yet, when the intellect is unable to pass through and penetrate entirely, although it desires immediately to grasp Him whom it came to know through the medium of the works, it [casts off] its own error concerning the world being without beginning.

^A For it will readily cast it aside, rightly reasoning that everything that is moved surely also had a beginning of its motion. And every motion is not without beginning, since it is not without cause. For that which moves has a beginning, and that which calls and draws it toward that which is the end is the cause. If, therefore, of every motion and of every being moved, that which moves is the beginning, and the end toward which the moved thing is carried is the cause (for nothing is moved without a cause), and nothing of existing things is unmoved, except that which primarily moves (for that which primarily moves is entirely unmoved, because it is also without beginning), then nothing of existing things is without beginning, for it is not also unmoved. For all things that exist in any way are moved, except for the one cause that is alone unmoved and above all things, even those that are intellectual and rational, in terms of knowledge and science, because it is not itself self-knowledge or self-science. For neither is their knowledge and science their essence, but they are habits contemplated in their essence, arising from the right judgment according to mind and reason (I mean the powers that constitute them). ^B

Contemplation concerning the contraction and dilation of essence, of quality and of quantity, according to which they cannot be without beginning.

But even essence itself, as it is simply called, is moved not only in the case of those things that are subject to generation and corruption—according to generation and corruption—but also in the case of all existing things, it has been moved and is moved by the reason and mode of dilation and contraction. For it is moved from the most generic genus through more general genera into the species through which and into which it is naturally disposed to be divided, proceeding as far as the most specific species, by which the dilation according to it is terminated, defining its being toward what is below; and it is gathered again from the most specific species, moving back through the more general ones ^C until the most generic genus, by which the contraction according to it is terminated, defining its being toward what is above. And thereafter, being circumscribed from both sides—I mean from above and from below—it is shown to have both a beginning and an end, being altogether incapable of the concept of infinity.

Likewise, also quantity is moved in every way in which it is naturally disposed to be contemplated, not only for those things subject to generation and corruption, according to increase and decrease, but the whole and all things are moved according to the reason of remission and intension, and being specified by the partial differences according to dilation, it is circumscribed, not having the ability to be poured out to infinity, but being gathered again and moving back, while releasing the species according to them, but not the innate species. Similarly, also quality, not only that of things in generation and corruption, is moved according to alteration, but the whole and that of all things, being moved by the mutable and dispersive nature of the difference according to it, admits of dilation and contraction. Now no one who is naturally disposed...

to sound reasoning would say that that which can be dissipated and contracted by reason or by force is altogether immobile. But if it is not immobile, it is not without a beginning; and if it is not without a beginning, it is clearly not unbegotten. Just as it is known that that which is moved has begun its motion, so it is known that the thing that has been brought into being has begun its generation, receiving both its being and its motion from the one and only unbegotten and immobile source. Now, that which has its beginning in the generation of its being can in no way be without a beginning. ^A

A demonstration that whatsoever is outside of God ^B is altogether in a place, and for this reason is of necessity also in time, and that whatsoever is in a place has altogether begun its being in time.

Now to omit the very existence of things—since it understands being as existing in some mode, and not simply, which is the first species of circumscription—who is ignorant of the fact that for every thing that exists in any way whatsoever, except for that which is divine and singular and properly transcends existence itself, the "where" is conceived of prior to it—with which, as necessity demands, we also simultaneously conceive of the "when"? For it is not possible to conceive of the "where" as privatively separated from the "sometimes" (for these are simultaneous, since they do not allow of being disjoined); nor, conversely, is the "sometimes" in any way privatively separated from the "where," with which it is conceived as one. Under the notion of place, however, all things, since they are in a place, become apparent. For the universe does not surpass the universe itself (for this is both absurd and impossible, to declare the universe itself to surpass its own universality), but it has its circumscription from itself within itself, after the infinite power of Him who is the cause and fountain of all things, which circumscribes all, and which is its limit exterior to itself. ^C Which is also the place of the universe; just as some define place, saying: "Place is the exterior circle surrounding the universe," or "the exterior position of the universe," or "the limit of the embracing body, in which the thing contained is comprehended."

And under the notion of time, since they are altogether in time, they will also be demonstrated together; inasmuch as all things that are after God have their being in some mode, not simply. And for this reason, they are not without a beginning. For whatsoever admits of a rational account according to some mode, even if it is, yet it was not. Whence, when we speak of the divine being, we do not speak of any existence; and for this reason we say "Is" and "Was" of Him simply, indefinitely, and absolutely. For the divine is inaccessible to every reason ^D and thought, according to which we do not say that it is by predicating existence of it. For being is from him, but he himself is not "being." For he is above existence itself, both that which is spoken of and conceived in a mode and that which is spoken of and conceived simply. If, however, beings have their being in a "how," but not simply, just as they are under "where" because of position and limit, and if...

they ^A must also necessarily be under "when" because of a beginning.

Demonstration that nothing can be infinite, and for this reason, nothing can be without a beginning, if it possesses its being according to quantity in plurality.

And again, if the essence of all things—since the things that are all together are many—cannot be infinite (for the limit of these many things that exist holds the quantity in plurality, which defines the account both of its being and of its "how-it-is," for the essence of all things is not left indeterminate), then clearly the subsistence of each individual will not be without circumscription, being circumscribed by one another in number and essence according to reason. If, however, none of the things that exist is free from circumscription, it is clear that all things existing have received, in proportion to themselves, both the "when-it-is" and the "where-it-is." For without these, nothing at all will be able to exist: not essence, not quantity, not quality, not relation, not action, not passion, not motion, not habit, nor any other thing of those by which the learned in these matters circumscribe the whole.

Therefore, [170 A] nothing that exists is without a beginning, if something else can be conceived prior to it, nor is anything without circumscription, if something else can be conceived together with it. But if none of the things that exist is without a beginning or without circumscription—as the argument, following the nature of what exists, has consistently shown—then there was absolutely a time when some of the things that exist were not; and if they were not, they have absolutely come to be, seeing that they were not. For it is not possible for it to be the case that both things are—both to be and to come to be—without conversion and change. For if it was and has come to be, it has been converted, having moved at the coming-to-be into that in which it was not, or it has been altered, having received the addition of the beauty of which it was deprived. But everything that is converted, or altered, or is deficient in form, cannot be self-sufficient.

That which is not self-sufficient will absolutely have need of another, which provides it with perfection; and such a thing is indeed perfect, but not self-sufficient, because it has the perfect not by nature, but by participation. And that which has need of another for perfection will have need of it to an even greater degree for its very being. For if, as they say, essence is superior to form, and that being, which they themselves wish to speak of, has been able to provide this to itself, or simply to possess it, how is it that it did not suffice to possess or provide for itself the lesser thing, I mean the form?

If, however, it did not suffice to provide for itself the lesser, or simply to possess that which—whether they wish to call it essence or matter, those who dare to ascribe the "without-a-beginning" to things that are after God and from God (for we do not dispute about this)—exists, how has it been able to possess the superior thing, I mean being itself, or simply to have it of itself, when it has proven powerless to attain the possession of the lesser? If, moreover, matter (170 B) in no way has been able to possess the lesser of itself, or simply to have it, then much less [can it be] sufficient unto itself.

VARIE LECTIONES * ἀνελλιπὲς cod. Gud. Quod in marg. ab eadem manu emendatum est in αὐτοτελές.

with respect to possession, I mean the form, has failed—as has been demonstrated—much less could the superior, I mean existence itself, ever be possessed. If this is so, then existence for all things that exist, as well as the form, is entirely a gift from God, since they do exist. And if all essence, and both matter and all form, is from God, then no one, unless he be utterly deprived of sound reasoning, would dare to call matter unmade or lacking a beginning, knowing that God is the Maker and Artificer of the nature of things.

Proof that whatever is moved, or seen to exist from eternity together with another differing in essence, cannot be infinite, and that the dyad is neither a beginning, nor without beginning, and that the monas alone is properly a beginning and without beginning.

^B And again, if, as some say, matter existed, then it was not created. But if it was not created, then it is not moved. And if it is not moved, it did not begin to be. And if it did not begin to be, it is entirely without beginning. And if it is without beginning, then it is infinite. And if it is infinite, then it is also entirely motionless (for everything infinite is absolutely motionless, since that which is not bounded has nowhere to move). But if this be so, there exist two things that are entirely infinite, without beginning, and motionless—God and matter—which is impossible. For the binary number is neither infinite, nor without beginning, nor motionless, nor can it be the beginning of anything whatsoever, since it is circumscribed by union and disjunction: by union, in that it has the existence of a composition of monads, by which it is contained as by parts, and into which it can be cut as into parts (but nothing that is divisible or [171 α] divided, or composite or capable of being composed, either by nature or position or any other way that can be conceived—and not even that which is simply called disjunction or composition—can be infinite, because it is not also simple and sole, and is numerable or numbered or co-numbered, or free from any relation whatsoever; for all these things are perceived in relation, whereas the infinite is without relation, since it has nothing at all joined to it relationally). ^C And [it is circumscribed] by disjunction, in that it is moved by number, from which it began and by which it is contained, since it does not have existence by nature and apart from relation. For every binary and every unit is composed of that which contributes to its part, by which number the units, which constitute it, are each taken away from the state of being uncircumscribed. ^D No one skilled in any manner of reasoning would say that anything is infinite with which something else distinct in essence is seen to be contemplated from eternity, since he would know that the definition of the infinite would be completely overturned for anyone who thinks this way. For the infinite is infinite in every respect, both in account and in mode—in essence, in power, in operation, and in both extremes, I mean both the upper and the lower, that is to say, both the beginning and the end. For it is incomprehensible in essence, and inconceivable in power, and in

action uncircumscribed; and it is that infinite thing which is without beginning above and without end below; and, to speak more truly and simply, it is indeterminate in every respect, since nothing at all, in any of the ways [171 B] enumerated, can be conceived along with it. For whatever reason or way we might say that some other thing, different in essence, could be compared to it, we would be taking away from it the whole account of its absolute infinity. But if it is impossible for anything to be infinite if some other thing different in essence coexists with it from eternity, then it is in no way possible for a dyad to be infinite. For monads, existing together by juxtaposition according to the dyad, define one another, neither allowing the other to be seen as indeterminate, but having it as merely adjacent and not as something it transcends, and so they rightly deprive one another of the account of infinity. But if, as has been shown, it is not possible for a dyad to be infinite, then it is clearly not without beginning, for a monad is the beginning of every dyad; and if it is not without beginning, then it is not immutable, for it is moved by number because of the union of monads, and it takes its existence into them through division. And if it is not immutable, it cannot be the beginning of anything else. For that which is moved is not a beginning, but is from a beginning, namely from that which moves it. But the monad alone is properly immutable, ^C because the monad is neither number, nor that which is numbered, nor that which is numerable (for the monad is not a part, nor a whole, nor a relation), and it is properly without beginning, because it has nothing more ancient than itself from which, being moved, it receives its existence as a monad; and it is properly infinite, because it has nothing that coexists with it or is numbered along with it; and it is properly a beginning, because it is the cause of every number, and of that which is numbered, and of that which is numerable, as being removed from every relation and from every part and whole, and it properly and truly, [172 A] primarily and alone and simply, exists as the first and only monad—but [it is] not [really] "first" or "only." And in saying this, we do not signify the blessed Deity as it is—which is infinitely, in every respect and reason and way, and to every mind and word and name, entirely inaccessible and unapproachable—but we provide for ourselves a firm and, for us, accessible and suitable boundary for faith in it. For the divine word does not ^D declare this name—I mean the name of "monad"—as if it were *representative* of the divine and blessed essence, but as *indicative* of its complete simplicity, which is beyond every quantity and quality, and every relation, so that we may know that it is not a whole as if composed of some parts, nor is it a part of any whole. For the Deity is above all division and composition, and above every part and whole, because it is without quantity, and removed from every concept of existence according to position and from the notion that defines how it is, because it is without quality, and free and exempt from every conjunction and affinity with anything else; for it is unrelated, having nothing before it or with it or after it, as it is beyond everything, and to none of the beings does it belong, but is altogether without beginning.

^A And the great and divine Dionysius, having perhaps grasped this, says: "Wherefore the celebrated monad and triad, the divinity that surpasses all, is neither monad nor triad, as recognized by us or by any other, but in order that we may truly hymn even that which is super-unified in it and generative of God, [172 B] we have called the triadic and unified divinity the super-named, and the super-essential to things that are." No one, therefore, who desires to live piously through the truth will be able to say that a dyad or a number is without beginning, or to say that the totality of anything is a beginning. For to him, God will appear to be one, through all of the power and knowledge that is contemplative according to reason and intellect, existing beyond all infinity, and in no way at all, in any respect, [known] to any of the beings, except only by faith—and this [is known] from His own works that He is, not that He is ever [fully] known—and that He is the Creator and Maker of every age and time and of all things that are in age and time; nor, in any manner whatsoever, does such a one add anything to Him as being from eternity, knowing that neither of two things that exist together with one another existentially from eternity can be the creator of the other. For this is utterly illogical and unacceptable, and laughable to those who have intelligence, that among those things which have their existence simultaneously, one should be the creator of the other. But let him accept that all things were brought forth from God who is always, from that which is not, entirely and as a whole—not partially and imperfectly—as being clearly brought forth from an infinitely knowing and infinitely powerful Cause; and that all things consist in Him as if guarded and held fast in an omnipotent root; and that all things return into Him as if into their own proper end, as the great Areopagite Dionysius says somewhere. Contemplation by which it is demonstrated that the providence of God follows all things according to their nature. [173 A] ^D And he who has learned through these things that God is, will also be persuaded that He is the provider of the beings, judging it to be just and reasonable that there be no other guardian and caretaker of the beings than the Creator of the beings Himself. For the very permanence of beings, and their order, and their position, and their motion, and the connection of the extremities with one another through the middle parts—with nothing at all harming one another on account of their contrariety—and the conspiring of the parts toward the wholes, and the consistent joining of the wholes to the parts throughout, and the [distinction] of the parts themselves toward one another

and the succession of all things and of each thing according to its kind—always preserved, without any of the inherent definitions of nature being destroyed or confused with anything else—clearly show that all things are held together by the providence of God the Creator. ^A For it is not possible that God, being good, should not also be entirely beneficent, nor that, being beneficent, He should not also be entirely providential; and for this reason, He is wisely the caretaker of existing things, providing for them their care in the same way as He bestowed upon them their existence. For providence, according to the God-bearing Fathers, is the care that comes from God to existing things. They also define it thus: Providence is the will of God by which [173 B] all existing things receive their appropriate course. But if it is the will of God—to use the words of the teachers—it is absolutely necessary that what occurs happens according to right reason, to such an extent that it does not await a better order. Therefore, he who has chosen to have truth as his guide, and has truly known Him as the Maker of existing things, or knew the things as having come from the Maker, will find himself compelled by every means to call Him the Provider; especially if, even in animals, when we apply our intellect—which searches into existing things—we discover an image that not unworthily emulates those things ^C which are beyond reason. For while we see those (animals) naturally caring for their own offspring according to their kind, we ourselves also, with pious confidence, piously define for ourselves the reason concerning the One who is the sole Provider of all existing things, and not of some while not of others, as certain of the external philosophers have supposed, but of all things together, according to one unchanging will of goodness, both of the universal and of the particular, knowing that if all particular things were to perish through lack of proper providence and keeping (for it is natural for the universal to consist of the particular), ^D then the universal itself will also perish together with them. We ourselves set forth the logical demonstration of this, which, through a suitable inversion, leads correctly to the truth. For if the universal consists in the particulars, and if, once the particulars have perished, it is impossible—as is admitted—to conceive of the universal as having any ground for its existence or remaining, then it is obvious to everyone that the universal will not stand either. For the parts are within the wholes, and the wholes are within the parts, both existing and subsisting. And no argument shall contradict this, except that even they themselves, as if bound by the truth, unwillingly proclaim the power of providence and construct it to run through all things, even through those by which they busied themselves (to prove otherwise). For by saying that only the universals are led by providence, they forget, while mentioning providence, that they themselves are particles; they are thus led by necessity to the truth which they strive to avoid. For if they think that universals, for the sake of their permanence, deserve providence, they establish that particulars deserve it much sooner.

in which the perennity and substance of the universe subsist. For they are affected by perennity simultaneously, on account of their natural and indissoluble relation with one another, such that when one is preserved in perennity, it is not possible to say that the other is alien to this preservation; and conversely, when one falls away from this guardianship of perennity, it is not fitting to say that the other remains in it. Now, those who deny that God provides for all things do so in three ways primarily. For they say that He either is ignorant of the way and method of providence, or is unwilling, or is unable. But certainly, in accordance with the common notions of all men, God is good and more than good, and He always and in every way destines good things by His will; and being wise and more than wise, or rather ^B the very fount of all wisdom, He utterly knows what is conducive; and being powerful, or rather of infinite power, He beautifully executes His decrees and conducive counsels in all things in a manner worthy of and fitting for God. As good and wise and powerful, He traverses all things, both visible and invisible, universals and particulars, small things and great, and all things that have existence according to any kind whatsoever, surrendering nothing of the infinity of His goodness, wisdom, and power, and preserving all things according to the principle of existence of each, both for themselves and for one another, in the indissoluble bond and connection ^C and perennity of all things. But what? Do we not see that our very nature, in its own existence, clearly instructs us concerning the divine providence that cares for all things? For that the knowledge of providence is naturally implanted in us, nature itself provides no small proof, when, without any prior instruction, as if impelling us toward God, it teaches us in sudden misfortunes to seek salvation from Him. For whenever we are suddenly overtaken by some necessity, we invoke God involuntarily, without any prior consideration, as if providence itself were drawing us to itself without the intervention of any counsels, and were forestalling the speed of our mental power, ^D and showing the divine aid to be more present than all other things. Nor would nature lead us involuntarily toward that which is void of nature. Surely, whatever follows naturally for anyone—as is obscure to all—possesses a powerful and invincible force for the demonstration of truth. But if, because the reason of the providence that cares for each individual thing is imperceptible to us, as it is also according to that saying: "How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out," (Rom. XI, 33) they should therefore deny that there is any providence, in my judgment they do not state this rightly. For if the discrepancy among individual men is great and imperceptible, as is each person’s own change and vicissitude—while in their manner of life, and characters, and wills, and counsels, and desires, and in their letters, businesses, studies, and in the very thoughts of the mind, which are almost infinite, and in all those things which, daily and almost every hour, change...

for this animal, man, is fickle and quickly changes according to the times and his needs—it is absolutely necessary that Providence, which with foreknowledge embraces all things individually within its circuit, should also appear diverse, varied, and manifold; and as it extends itself along with things so multiplied that they cannot be numbered, it must be adapted to each individual act and thought, and even to the subtle motions that arise in the mind or body. If, therefore, the difference among individual things exceeds our comprehension, and the reason of the Providence that adapts itself to them is infinite, we must not, however, because the reason of the Providence that manages individual parts is infinite and unknown to us, attempt from our own ignorance to do away with the all-wise governance of the things that exist. Rather, we ought to praise and accept simply and without scrutiny, as is pleasing and profitable to God, the works of Providence, and believe that what comes to pass is done well, even if we cannot attain its reason. And when I say "all things," I speak of the things of Providence—for I do not include things that we do wrongly of our own accord and by our own choice; for these are absolutely alien to the reason of Providence. Having therefore ^B conjectured—not with a certain interpretation, for our mind is far from equaling his truth—the method of the power and grace of the saints in accordance with reason and contemplation, as indicated by this great master, I have endeavored in this disputation to follow his meaning in word and, as it were, to trace his footsteps; and this is simply what I suspect it to be.

A diverse contemplation regarding the material dyad overcome by the saints, and what the unity understood in the Trinity is.

That the saints overcome the material dyad, I suspect he means that because of the unity understood in the Trinity, they overcome matter and form, from which bodies are derived. By implying that they have overcome the flesh and matter, he means that, having broken through these, they were deemed worthy to meet with God and to be tempered and infused with the most pure light—that is to say, having laid aside the relation of the soul to the flesh, and through the flesh to matter, or, to speak in general terms, having laid aside every natural necessity of the sensible essence toward the sensible, they rightly followed only the divine appetite, on account of the unity which, as I said, is understood in the Trinity. For since they understood the soul to be placed between God and matter, and to possess the powers for uniting and merging itself with both—the intellect, I mean, toward God, and the sense toward matter—they utterly cast off the sense, together with the sensibles, through its relative operation in the affections, and through the intellect alone, ^D in an ineffable way...

^A in which they are united, the whole to God, having beheld the whole as an image of the archetype, according to mind and reason and spirit, in as much as it is possible to have that which is akin to the likeness, they were mystically taught the unity contemplated in the Trinity. Perhaps the master also called the irascible and the concupiscible the material dyad, because they are attached to matter and are powers of the passible part of the soul, and because they struggle against reason and can distract the mind into many things, unless one has, from the beginning, skillfully bridled them and yoked them to oneself. But if someone should overcome them and persuade them to run whither they ought, so that they appear subject to the command of reason, or even should he entirely abandon them and, alone, hold fast to the rational and contemplative attraction, which inclines to neither side through knowledge-based love, and should contract the force of the most powerful movement of appetite away from the many, to the one and single and pure and indivisible, ^B by which, regarding God, he perpetually and philosophically established for himself stability in the identity of the eternal movement of appetite, he is truly blessed; and he has attained not only a true and blessed union with the holy Trinity, but also the unity contemplated within the holy Trinity, being himself simple, indivisible, and uniform in power, having become such toward that which is simple and indivisible in essence, and having imitated, according to the capacity of the virtues, the goodness which is always the same, and having laid aside the property of the naturally divisible powers for the sake of the grace of the unified God.

Exposition concerning the passible part of the soul, and its universal divisions and subdivisions.

^C [176b] For it is divided, as they say, into that part of the passible soul which obeys reason, and that which does not obey reason. And that which does not obey reason they divide into the nutritive, which they call physical, and the physical, which they call vital—neither of which is led by obedience to reason; and it is called "not obeying reason" because it is not by nature led by reason. For to grow, or to be in good health, or to live, is not within our power. But that which obeys reason is divided into two: the concupiscible and the irascible. They call it "obeying reason" because it is naturally led and subject to reason in good things. ^D Again, they divide the concupiscible into pleasure and pain. For concupiscence being satisfied produces pleasure, but being frustrated, pain. And again, in another way, they say that concupiscence, being divided, makes four forms in all, including itself: concupiscence, pleasure, fear, and pain. And since of existing things some are good and others evil, and these are either present or future, they called the expected good "concupiscence," but the present, "pleasure"; and again, the expected evil "fear," but the present, "pain"—so that it is and is considered…

^A regarding good things, whether they truly exist or are thought to exist, as pleasure and concupiscence, and regarding evils, as pain and fear. Again, they divide pain into four: anguish, molestia, envy, and pity. And they say that anguish is a pain that causes speechlessness in those affected by it, because the part of the reasoning faculty that is the seat of counsel descends ^B into the depths. Molestia is a pain that weighs down and troubles one in unpleasant circumstances; envy is a pain at the good things of others; and pity is a pain at the adverse and miserable things of others. They held that all pain is evil by its own nature. For even if a good man is pained at the misfortunes of others, as one who is merciful, he is not pained intentionally and by prior purpose, but secondarily and according to the occasion. The contemplative, however, remains passionless even in such matters, having united himself to God and become alienated from the affairs of this world.

They further divide fear ^C into six parts: tergiversation, bashfulness, shame, stupor, consternation, and torpor. And they define tergiversation as fear of a future action; bashfulness as fear regarding the anticipation of reproach; shame as fear regarding some base thing already done; stupor as fear conceived from a great and vehement imagination; consternation as fear from immense, overwhelming reports that take away the senses; and finally, agony (or torpor) as the fear of a fall, that is, of an unhappy outcome and the frustration of one's hope. For while we fear lest we fail to attain our desires, we are in agony. Some call this also cowardice.

They say that anger, in turn, is a boiling of the blood ^D around the heart due to a desire for reciprocal pain. They divide this also into three: into indignation, which some have called bile and choler; into wrath (μῆνις); and into rancor (κότος). They say that indignation is anger having a beginning and motion toward action, or anger in the process of acting. Bile is defense provided by another against the one who caused the pain. Choler is the retaliation brought about by the person in pain himself against the one who caused it. Wrath is anger that has grown old (being so named because it remains and is retained in the memory), and rancor is anger watching for an opportunity for vengeance (it is so named because it lies in wait: κεῖσθαι). They further divide each of these into many other things. If one wished [177b] to consign these to writing through a precise examination, he would accumulate much discourse and consume much time, to the point that it would be unbearable for the readers due to the sheer volume.

It is therefore truly a great and admirable thing, requiring much attention and zeal, and before these, divine assistance, to be able, first of all, to master the material dyad of the innate powers—I mean the irascible and the concupiscible—and the divisions according to them. Blessed is he who has been able to lead these readily wherever reason deems fit, until he is purged by moral philosophy of the earlier thoughts—those that belong to the practical or active life.

^A

Contemplation from Scripture on the fact that he who is endowed with the faculty of knowledge should not join the law of nature with the law of wisdom, and what the letter alpha added to the name of Abraham signifies.

Furthermore, that great Abraham learned, through the divine voice descending into his understanding, that he must also overcome these powers and cast them off entirely, just as he did Hagar and Ishmael. For his mind was already able to be exercised in contemplation of divine things, as it was in the sacrifice of that Isaac. He learned that the progeny of free spiritual knowledge in the intellect cannot, when it is joined to the servile seed of the flesh, obtain the blessed promise—which is the grace of deification set before those who love the Lord in hope. He had already anticipated this in a typical way, ^B being mystically joined through faith to the principle of the monad. By this he became uniform, or rather, from many he became one; he was gathered magnificently alone to the God who is sole, taking with him no image at all of any of those things that are scattered. This, I think, is the power signified by the letter alpha that was added to his name. Hence, he was called the father of those who are led to God through faith after renouncing all things that are after God, since they—by being images of the father in spirit through faith—could be free, just as he was.

Contemplation on Moses regarding the taking off of his sandals.

Perhaps it was also this, at the beginning of the gnostic life, that the great Moses was being taught by the divine voice when he approached to behold the light appearing mystically in the bush—when it said: *Loose the sandals from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground* 9. ^C He learned that the soul must be perfectly loosed in its disposition from all things corporal, the soul which is set upon the path of contemplation to understand celestial realities and is instituted in gnostic perfection; and that by the laying aside of the sandals it must maintain a complete alienation from the former life lived in the habit of the flesh.

Contemplation on the parts of the sacrifices.

This, again, perhaps that same most divine Moses signified in the regulations for the sacrifices, commanding that the fat, the kidneys, the breast, and the lobe of the liver be cut away from the offerings. He meant, of course, the general powers of our passions—I mean irascibility and concupiscence, which is the truly material dyad—and that their active forces must be cut away and burned up by the divine fire of the power that acts through knowledge. ^D Concupiscence [is signified] by the kidneys, its active force—that is, pleasure—by the parts of the fat or suet, and irascibility by the breast and its active force

[while] the gall, in which bitter and very sharp bile is fixed, is signified by the fiber of the liver and that which is connected with it.

A Short Contemplation on the Different Types of Leprosy According to the Law.

In this passage concerning leprosy as well, I think [Scripture] wisely signifies through symbolic enigmas the affection of leprosy, dividing it into four types—into white, and green, and red, and dark—by which the irascible and concupiscible [faculties], divided into their species, are revealed: concupiscence ^B through the white and the green, being shown to be divided into pleasure and pain; irascibility, through the red and the dark, being cut into anger and wrath and the hidden malice of hypocrisy. For these are the primary types of the passions beneath them, as they say, and all the more principal offspring of irascibility and concupiscence; for it is not possible for the soul afflicted by these, as long as it is stung by them, to be counted among the number of the divine phalanx.

Contemplation on Phinehas and Those Slain by Him.

I believe this also signifies that admirable Phinehas by the zeal he had in himself. For by transfixing the Midianite womanmystically with the spear along with the Israelite, he showed that the matter must be entirely cast out of the soul along with the form, and concupiscence along with irascibility, and foreign pleasure along with the passionate ^C thought, through the power of the Word as High Priest. For form holds the same relationship to matter as irascibility does to concupiscence, for by its approach it gives motion to it, [which is] immovable by itself; and [as] the thought [does] to pleasure, being naturally adapted to bestow form upon it, which, according to its own nature, is without form and shapeless. The very power and meaning of the names also declare this. For the Midianite woman is called Chasbi, which is "my titillation," and the Israelite [is called] Zambri, which is "my song"—that is, "my exaltation." Therefore, when the rational part of the soul, having turned away from divine meditation and contemplation, and having been exalted by the material titillation of the flesh, is united ^D in the furnace of sin, it is absolutely in need of the Word as a zealous High Priest, both for the destruction of those who have been so evilly joined together, and for the averting of the imminent divine indignation.

Contemplation on the [saying], "Do not give what is holy to the dogs," and on [the saying], "That the apostles ought to carry neither staff, nor wallet, nor sandals."

This also is what the Lord Himself, as it seems to me, perhaps signified; partly where He says, "Do not give the holy [thing] to the dogs," and...

"do not cast pearls before swine:" ^A calling "holy," perhaps, the intellectual part in us, as it is an image of divine glory, which He commanded that we should not allow to be unworthily barked at and perturbed by the movements of irascibility; and calling "pearls" His divine and splendid thoughts, with which everything worthy is naturally adorned, and which He commanded to be kept undefiled and free from the unclean passions of material desire. And this, among other things, He also declares when He instructs His holy disciples, who were being sent out to preach, on how they should be unencumbered and free from all superfluities: "Do not take a wallet for your journey, nor a staff, nor sandals for your feet," as it is necessary that he who has girded himself for the journey to sublime knowledge should be free of every material burden, and delivered from every passible state arising from desire and irascibility, as is demonstrated by the wallet and the staff—the one signifying desire, the other irascibility. ^B Primarily, however, it is so that one may be naked of the wickedness of hypocrisy, which, like a sandal, covers the trace of life and obscures the passible aspect of the soul with a pretense of equity. Being dressed in this hypocrisy, the Pharisees—having a form of piety but not piety itself—even if they thought they were hidden, were nevertheless refuted and taught by the Word.

Contemplation on the Lunatic

From this material duality—I mean irascibility and desire—the Lord again, if I am not mistaken, liberated the lunatic, or rather, when the evil demon wished to destroy him by the fire of irascibility and the water of desire, He restrained and put an end to his frantic madness (for the relation of the moon—as it waxes and wanes—to the affairs of those who are overcome by material things differs in no way from men). ^C Laying hold of this, the demon who rouses the passions never ceases to cast the mind into desire and irascibility—like water and fire—and to choke it, until the Word and Reason of God arrives and expels the material and wicked spirit (by whom the "old and earthy man" is characterized), and delivers the one being worked upon from the wicked tyranny, restoring and bestowing upon him his natural temperance, through which the "new man, created according to God," is revealed. Thus, then, all the saints, having genuinely taken hold of the divine and infallible Word, have passed through this age, imprinting the trace of their soul on none of the pleasures that it contains. For, having directed their eyes most rightly—I mean towards the highest of the reasons about God that are attainable by humans, namely, goodness and love—they were taught that God was moved by these to bestow existence and the "well-being" upon the things that are (if indeed it is lawful to speak of movement in God, who alone is immovable and not rather...)

never moves), they wisely modeled themselves after these, bearing the property of that invisible and hidden beauty of the divine magnificence, which manifests itself through the virtues, in a manner worthy of imitation. Accordingly, they became good, lovers of God, lovers of mankind, compassionate, and merciful; and they were seen to possess one single affection of charity toward the whole human race. By this ^A they held fast, throughout their entire life, to that most exquisite kind of all virtues—I mean humility—which guards the good and destroys the contrary; and they did not succumb at all to any of the troubling temptations, whether voluntary ones, which are subject to our reason, or involuntary ones, which are not subject to our reason; for they repressed the outbursts of the former by means of temperance, and they shook off the attacks of the latter by means of fortitude. Assailed from both sides by glory and by disgrace, they remained unshaken and stood immovable against both, neither wounded by insults—due to their voluntary yielding—nor admitting glory—due to their surpassing embrace of poverty. Whence there was no anger, no envy, no dissension, no hypocrisy, no guile, no flattering and seductive love—that most ruinous of all passions—which by an alluring pretext craftily draws one toward something else; nor was there any desire for those things that seem to be most splendid in this life, nor any other thing from the wicked crowd of passions; nor did threats leveled by enemies, nor any manner of death, overcome them. ^B Therefore, they were justly judged blessed both before God and before men, because they rendered themselves manifest images of that unspeakable and radiant glory which is to be revealed, according to the grace of the great gift of God, so that, rejoicing as if in familiar and well-known reasons of the virtues—or rather, in God, for whom they persevered in dying daily—they might be united to Him, in whom the reasons of all good things, as in a perennial fountain, pre-exist through the single, simple, and unitary comprehension of all things, and to whom all are drawn who use well and according to nature the faculties given to them for this purpose.

From the forty-second discourse of the Theologian ^C regarding what he mentioned of blessed Job, on the text: "The things that followed are small, and ordained for the sake of small things."

Regarding the pronouncement made by God to Job, I think that, in comparing the things that were granted him after the struggles of the temptations, He called the temporal things "small," since they could in no way be compared to the eternal. ^D He says they were "ordained for the sake of small things"—that is, for those who are small regarding the gnostic state of the mind, who are easily scandalized in considering the reasons concerning providence and judgment, and who fluctuate regarding piety itself. Concerning these, the Lord in the Gospels...

says: *He who scandalizes one of these little ones...*a For whenever they see a just man infirm, or poor, or in any other way suffering hardship (and the weaker ones among them almost judge his whole standing, how much more so in the sudden reversal of Job, who was acknowledged by all to be just?), they might have had to endure this [scandal], if his former splendor and fame had not returned to him doubled in the body. Concerning these, therefore, it was said by the Teacher: *Ordained for the sake of the little ones.*

From the same discourse, on the text: "He cleanses the temple from the sacrilegious and merchants of God and Christ," except that he does not do this with a plaited lash, but by a discourse adapted to persuasion.

Nor does this most illustrious ^B teacher show our Lord and God to be more severe in these matters than the blessed Father Athanasius, as some have supposed—far be it! Nor, indeed, does he favor St. Athanasius by saying that the latter used a discourse, while the former used a lash in cleansing the temple of the sacrilegious merchants. This would make it necessary, according to the proverb, for us to conclude one of two things: either that our Lord and God was ignorant of the gentler method of healing, or that St. Athanasius, ignorant of the modes of spiritual care, indulged in untimely humanity. But since the reasoning faculty of those things which we have done, being stirred within us ^C as in a living and animate temple, produces a repentance corresponding to the transgressions, through which Christ, who is God and the Word, always strikes us when we sin, as if using a plaited lash—namely, the conscience itself, which is twisted by our wicked and wrong thoughts and deeds—while the holy Athanasius gently led those who sinned to amendment, as one who himself was clothed in the flesh of infirmity, it is for this reason that I think this God-minded teacher used these words in a tropical and figurative sense.

From the same, from the extemporaneous discourse *Against the Eunomians*, on the text: "For there are, there are some whose hearing and tongue itch."

Those who have applied their studies to ^D words, and have acquired no common glory in knowing their precise meanings, and who conclude that it is necessary to assign to each thing a fitting expression—one that is descriptive of the signified object regardless of what it is, in whatever way it might happen to be spoken, as an unmixed property—have rightly pronounced that those whose hearing and tongue itch are those who desire to learn or say something newer, and who always rejoice in innovations, moving the boundaries—to speak figuratively—which their fathers set, and who delight in recent and unusual things, rather than [holding to] those things which are accustomed.

^A And, as one might say, they rise up against those things which are long-known and of old, as if they were stale, worn out, and worthless, welcoming instead, and with joy, the newer things, even if they happen to be false and possess no benefit which might pass into the soul. ^B It is for the sake of the soul, in particular, that every pious word and saving labor is sung, written, and practiced: one [labor] arming itself against ignorance, the other against pleasure—the one, in order that, by cutting away the defects of the soul, it may reconcile it to God through knowledge [for it possesses the truth], and may bring joy to those who delight in such teachings, and by sending the mind aloft above things seen and understood, it may charm it with the ineffable love of divine beauty, and fix it with such longing that it is not able to be carried anywhere else, or rather, that it might not even endure to be able to do so; the other, in order that it may strike out the nails of the relationship [the soul has] according to pleasure—nails by which the soul’s desire and tension toward God were fixed, through the ancient disobedience, to matter and to things which perish—and that it might liberate those who have been clothed in wickedness, and make them true disciples of virtue, and render them immovable and unshaken against all things which seem to hinder the soul’s familiarization with the Good, having taught [the soul] [182 a] temperance, for the turning away from pleasure, which through the things within our power fraudulently fawns upon and softens the firmness of our resolve, and persuades us to prefer the present to the future, and things seen to things understood; and, for the laying aside of fear and cowardice, [having taught] endurance and the courage perfected therefrom—that is, the unyielding and unconquerable disposition toward every pleasure that is within our power and every pain that is not within our power—by [the soul’s] putting forward those things which are grievous and which seem to exceed human capacity as if they were not in our power, and [by the soul’s] violently struggling to prevail through the introduction of terrifying things against the sobriety of a prudent mind. And the Master called those of whom the discourse treats "having itching ears and tongues," since every discourse is naturally meant to be called upon and uttered through the tongue, and to be heard and learned through the ear. But if we should wish to receive what is said according to another intent—those having an itching ear and tongue—perhaps they will be those who are eager only to hear and to bring forth mockery, or the slander or abuse of others, and who judge it to be witty and charming to rise up ignorantly against every discourse and person, and who, before the one whom they suspect or envy even says anything, are panting in their spirit, and as it were pushing the soul forward, and preparing the ear and the tongue for the hunting of some syllable or word—not that they might be gladdened, but that they might malign [him] and have material for their own babbling against him. This is what the enemies of the truth of that time did to this holy man, leaping forth and rising up even before the things were spoken; just as those horses [182 b] that are trained for war and for the race, which even before the games and the trumpet, straighten their ears

^A strike the ground with their feet, and dig with their hooves, and excite themselves toward the course, often getting ahead of the goad that urges them on. Yet, while no blame attaches to horses because they are devoid of reason, and do not await the appropriate times of the contests which are signaled by the sound of the trumpet and the blow of the whip, in the case of such men, there is no blame that can be devised to match the worth of their wickedness. Their occupation and endeavor is the meditation of falsehood and the assault upon the truth. Rightly, then, let such men be called tickled in their hearing and tongue, because just as some very sharp and thick humor, lurking in the depths of the body, is often irritated by itching and brought out into the open, so too does a certain hidden affection, ^B once these detractors of good discourse have seized an opportunity, irritate them to bring their soul's malignancy out into the public view, an affection which settles all the more deeply the more it seems to be weakened by its own process. For the affection of wicked men does not merely emerge from the depths through the crimes they commit, but it also consumes everything external with its fury, and it by no means relinquishes its seat in the soul.

Ex eodem sermone, in illud:

“Just as a flower in winter is utterly untimely, and masculine attire for women or feminine for men, or the study of geometry for sorrow.”

Moderation in all speech and every matter, by which the account of the beauty of each and every thing is manifested whole and pure, is what the master, by proposing an example through an enumeration of dissimilar things, teaches here, so that those who wish to be moderate and cautious might be instructed against being forward, immoderate, and ignorant of any mode—not indeed of any thing, but especially of the mode of disputing about God—whereas they audaciously and rashly mix and confound all things that are discrepant among themselves. For if it is against nature and the legitimate order of things to see a flower in winter, or to see a woman wearing ^C masculine attire, or a man wearing feminine attire, or to speak of geometry as being fitting for sorrow (for the former innovates upon time and abandons its proper station and order; the second falsifies nature by interchanging it, appearing as it does in man and woman, and removes the mode that is convenient and proper to them by nature; while the third, ^D by attempting to bring into one things that cannot coexist—I mean joy and sorrow—thoroughly corrupts and destroys them), shall not the discourse about God—if it is poured forth rashly and by anyone at all, and is moreover brought forth at a time and place where it is not fitting—be far more formless and unbecoming, and in no way worthy to be heard? Since, as I feel, prudent men must choose an appropriate time for discoursing about God all the more carefully, insofar as, concerning those things that are clearly discrepant and have no commerce with one another which the master has mentioned, he calls geometry unfitting for sorrow,

^A for he thinks, as I suppose, in ways such as these: or because those who have seized some region by military hand divide it up by means of geometry when they wish to hold it by the law of the kingdom, and it is a matter of the greatest joy—joy for those who pursue only present goods, and to become victors, and to acquire massive wealth—to whom it is impossible that any sorrow of any kind should be joined; or since those who are skilled in these matters say that coercive syllogisms are properly attributed to geometry, someone might reasonably appear foolish, and little understanding what is fitting, who, by applying a syllogism to a person who is mourning, uselessly attempts to prove that he is mourning; or perhaps someone might say that it is even ^B alien to sorrow itself, that is, to its nature, and that it is not consistent for one who is mourning to construct syllogisms and attempt to persuade himself by probable arguments of a misfortune that has in reality happened to him. For just as sorrow itself is cast out by the one who is mourning and constructing syllogisms, so also does the sorrow cease to be sorrow when it transfers itself to the task of syllogizing. For if a person has lost someone in whom he had placed his hope of succession, he will consider all these earthly things to be superfluous and vain for him. And perhaps in this way someone might say that the things we have contemplated are not without reason, if he remembers that joy and sorrow cannot occur together, since the creative cause of each does not, clearly, derive its origins from the same principles. And the sponsor and witness for us of this matter is the holy and divine-minded Dionysius the Areopagite, ^C who, while explaining the angelic iconography, says thus: "And the geometrical and technical instruments, the capacity for founding, building, and completing, and whatever else belongs to the guiding and leading providence of the lower realms." All these things demonstrate a cheerful disposition, to which sorrow is entirely contrary, and therefore unfitting. But if it is possible to interpret the passage in another way, I do not believe it is inopportune to add also the saying of Jesus Sirach to what has been said. For it is this: "Music in mourning is an untimely narrative." Since, therefore, music encompasses all the disciplines, of which those who have devoted their study to these matters say that geometry ^D is one, for this reason, I suppose, the master, agreeing with the one who uttered the aforementioned saying, said that geometry is unfitting for sorrow. But if someone should say: "Why, having omitted the other disciplines, did he seize upon this one alone as being incongruent with sorrow?" we respond that he considered this one to be properly joined to the aforementioned points. Furthermore, through this one, the rest were also included by synecdoche. Let these things, for my part, have been said. But if someone were to discover something better, I shall give thanks, having received from him knowledge of the things of which I was ignorant.

^A Of the same, from the Great Theologian, on the passage: "For that God exists, and that there is a creative and sustaining cause of all things, both sight and the natural law teach: the former by fixing its gaze upon visible things and perceiving that they are beautifully set, stable, and proceeding, and moving and revolving, so to speak, without motion; the latter by reasoning out from visible, ordered things their Author."

^B He who approaches the magnitude of visible things, as well as their beauty and nature, with reason, through sense-perception—not permitting it to act entirely on its own, separated from the governing reason, nor leaving the reason itself free from the simplicity of the intellect—through which the species and forms of sense-perception are naturally led by the mediation of the rational power into manifold "logoi," and the diversity of the rational power, by the variety of the manifold "logoi" in existing things, is gathered into a unified, simple, and indifferent apprehension, by which a knowledge called impartible, without quantity, and unitary is constituted; such a man truly, through visible things and the good order within them, has fashioned in his mind [an image of] their Maker, sustainer, and leader, as far as is possible for a human being; and he has known God—not by learning what his essence and subsistence are (for this is impossible and unapproachable), but by learning that he alone is. And this after passing beyond the entire transit of sense-perception in the form of position, shape, molding, and imagination; and if I should not appear excessive to anyone, having even moved entirely outside the very difference of the "logoi" of existing things, and having placed himself as a kind of boundary between God and all things after God—the one as remaining entirely transcendent and untouchable, having no knowledge that can reach him, while the others are left behind, surpassed by the supereminence of mental knowledge, and seen as inferior to the mind. ^C When it is firmly and truly understood what is superior to them, these things, it seems to me, the Master wishes to signify through sight and the natural law according to the assigned cause, and not to posit sight and the natural law as one and the same thing, as some have thought. For both, while exercising their power upon the same things, can be perceived as differing from one another by reflection, insofar as the former, irrationally, merely rests upon the touch of visible things, unable to proceed further; whereas the latter, joined with attendant reason, diligently investigates these things and elevates itself well and prudently by the mind, through which the natural law most especially insinuated the apprehension and faith concerning the existence of God through sight. ^D Therefore, he called "sight" the act of sense-perception simply—not in any particular way—directed toward sensible things (for it is not the property of sense-perception as such to infer one thing from another); and he called "natural law" that natural energy which occurs through sense-perception, by way of mind and reason, according to which, from what is worse, a suitable ascent is made by the help of investigation to what is better.

^A Regarding those things that are seen, the Master has said that they are moved and carried according to the reason by which these things came to be, according to nature, power, and activity, and that they possess order and perseverance without change, and do not deviate in any respect from their natural property, nor transform into another and become confused. But they are moved again by the reason of flux and reflux, by increase in quantity and decrease, and by change in quality, and to speak properly, by the succession and alternation of one succeeding another, while those things which have been anticipated always yield to those that follow. And to sum it up briefly, all existing things, according to the reason by which they have subsisted and exist, are entirely stable and immovable; but according to the reason of the things observed about them, by which the economy of this whole is clearly constituted and carried out, all things are evidently moved and are unstable.

They say that ^B motion and impulse are not the same thing. For they say that motion belongs rather to those things subject to generation and corruption, as they admit to those things observed about them the notions of increase and decrease (even if this can be said properly of all created things), whereas they mean impulse to be the rotation of a substance moving itself in a circle and tirelessly. I do not know if it is safe for one attempting to speak of the universe to say that it operates naturally, or that it is urged—except that it should be said that it is peculiar to that which is urged that it is carried along. For no thing, of all that exists, operates entirely by itself, because it is not without a cause; and what is not without a cause is entirely moved by a cause, whence it appears that the cause is urged to move itself naturally, toward which and to which it directs the motion. For without a cause, nothing of those things that are moved is moved anywhere in any way.

The ^C beginning of all natural motion is the generation of those things that are moved, and the beginning of the generation of those things that are moved is God, as the Creator. The end of the natural generation of things that have come into being is the state, which, after the passing of things that have limit, the infinity brings about, in which, on account of the cessation of existence, every motion of those natural things that are moved makes an interval, having nothing left as to where or how or toward what it might move, since it has God—who defines even the very infinity that terminates all motion—as its end, as the Cause. Therefore, the beginning and end of all generation and motion of existing things is God, since it is from Him that they have been generated and are moved, and in Him they will bring about their state.

Now, generation is conceived as prior to all natural motion of existing things, and motion ^D according to nature is conceived as prior to all state. If, therefore, generation is conceived as prior by nature to motion, and state is conceived as following by nature upon motion, it is evident that generation and state cannot subsist simultaneously, while they have between them the motion which naturally separates one from the other. For the state is not the natural activity of the generation of things being moved, but the end of the power or activity pertaining to the state, or however else one might wish to call this.

^A For things that have been made have been made under action, and every action pertains to some end, that it may not be incomplete. For that which has not an end of its natural activities is not perfect; but the end of the natural activities of things that have been made is ^B the state of the movement toward the cause of the things that have been generated. For example, so that we may perceive from one instance the mode of movement in all beings: the soul, being an intellectual and rational essence, both thinks and reasons, using as a faculty the mind, while for movement it has intellection, and for activity it has the thought. For this is the limit of the intellection of both the thinker and the thought, as being that which bounds the relationship that exists between the extremities with one another. For upon thinking, the soul ceases from thinking that which was thought, after its intellection of it. For that which is thought, strictly speaking, calls forth the faculty of the soul only once, and no longer a second time; and through each separate thought, the soul thus receives a state, according to the kind of intellection that occurs at the thought of that which is thought. When, therefore, it has passed through by ^C thought all the thoughts of all things that are thought—both sensible and intelligible—then the soul ceases, even as from all things that are thought, so also from the whole of intellection and the relationship towards all things both relative and intelligible; and it has nothing remaining at all to think, after the intellection of those things which can naturally be thought. After this, it will be united with God, above mind and reason and knowledge, in an unthinking, unknown, and [186 B] ineffable manner, by a simple apprehension, not thinking anything at all, nor indeed even considering or estimating God. For He is not one of the things that are thought, such that the soul could have an intellection of Him by way of any relationship; but it is by a simple union—as being devoid of relationship—transcending intellection, and by a certain ineffable and inexplicable manner, which God alone knows, who bestows this unspeakable grace upon those who are worthy, and upon those who are hereafter to experience it, when all things shall be free from all change and alteration, when the movement of things that exist, insofar as it is around anything toward a goal, will have entirely received its end in the infinity around God, in which all things that are moved receive their state. For it is the infinity around God, and not God Himself, which surpasses this in an incomparable way. Rightly, therefore, I believe, he who posits the pre-existence of souls—in the manner of the Gentiles, mingling things that abhor being mingled, and asserting that the state subsists in substance contemporaneously with the generation of rational beings—merits the gravest censure; for ^D it does not accord with the true doctrine that generation should be conceived before the state, which is by nature immovable, nor that a state should be conceived after an immovable generation, nor, finally, that the state should be conceived together with the generation. For the state is not a faculty of generation, such that it might be conceived together with the generation of created things, but is the end of the activity of the generative faculty of the things that have been generated. And simply, to summarize, if the state is of things that are "relative to something," it is said to be not relative to generation, but to movement, to which it also receives its distinction, while it is by no means referred to generation, to which it does not admit of being distinguished. So long, therefore, as I hear "the state," I understand only the cessation of movement. If, however, of things that are according to existence, it is not [187 A]

^A that generation and state are contemporaneous, he who declares this clearly adulterates the reason of truth, and postulates that the immovable unity pre-exists together with the generation of rational beings. But if someone should say, "And how is 'state' attributed to God, when it does not admit of movement being conceived before itself?" I respond first: The Creator and the created are not the same, so that what can belong to one might necessarily be observed in the other in the same way, since in this way the difference between them that exists by nature would in no way be manifest. Then, to speak properly, God neither moves at all nor stands (for this is peculiar to things that are naturally limited and have a beginning of existence), nor does He do or suffer anything at all of those things that are thought of and spoken of regarding Him for our sake, because by nature He is above all movement and state, and is not subject to our human modes by any reason. Let these things be said by way of digression concerning the fact that we ought not to say that any of the things that exist act absolutely by nature, lest we foolishly introduce something among things posterior to God that is without a cause, but [rather that] that which is by nature adapted to be acted upon acts as it is naturally moved to act. ^B

Of the Same Discourse, on the text: "But if it is incorporeal, not even this is yet indicative of essence, just as neither is the unbegotten, and the beginningless, and the unchangeable, and the incorruptible, and whatever else is said to be about God or around God."

Directing his discourse against those who most wickedly introduce the Son as unlike the Father ^C because—as I suppose—they believe the "unbegotten" to be the essence of the Father, and instructing them from similar things what they ought to recognize, the teacher says these things: that, being driven by the truth toward piety, they might willingly concede to us that "the unbegotten" signifies only that the Father does not have generation, being aware that if they were to struggle to maintain that the "unbegotten" is the essence of God, they would necessarily be forced, if they were consistent with themselves, to declare that God's essence is also "the incorporeal," and "the beginningless," and "the immortal," and "the unchangeable," and ^D "the incorruptible," and whatever else is said to be God by way of privative negation directed toward His supreme excellence; and thus they would be convicted of declaring many essences of God, and not one, or rather—to speak more properly and truthfully—of suffering from the Hellenic disease of polytheism. Since they would be ashamed to say this—as it is impious—they will surely desist from their madness, even against their will. For privative or negative [terms] observed regarding any thing are not the very thing itself that they are observed regarding, because they do not at all signify what that thing is, but rather they signify what that thing is not; and if this is so, the definition of that

^A regarding which they are said to be, will be shown to be absurd and impossible. For definitions are not gathered from those things which do not exist, but from those things which do exist, unfolding the concise grasp of those things, which is their name. Therefore, nothing at all of what is said about God or around God can ever be the essence of God, because it cannot indicate even a position—which pertains only to God and to Him alone, is devoid of relationship, and is absolutely free from any activity relative to something—nor can it indicate what that thing itself is according to its essence and substance.

From the same discourse, on that which says: ‹For just as it is not sufficient to say "body," or "having been generated," to demonstrate ^B and manifest this or that about which these revolve, but it is also necessary to say what is the subject of these, if one wishes to demonstrate perfectly and fully what we are thinking; for either man, or ox, or horse can be this which is in a body and subject to destruction.›

Since the saint saw that the heretics struggled for this one thing—insanely to reduce the superessential nature to their own level, and by artificial reasonings to attempt to grasp within their own comprehension of knowledge the power which is insuperable and equally inaccessible to every condition—he preferred, throughout the entire discourse, to speak of God privatively and negatively. He indulged in no position or affirmation ^C at all, lest, like shameless dogs, they might grip this fast and madly rush with venomous teeth upon the discourse of truth, finding an occasion to pretend and to deceive in any manner, and to construct the artifice of their own zeal, making for themselves any kind of granted position of discourse about God. Therefore, he declares that God is neither body, nor immaterial body, nor incorporeal at all, nor in the universe, nor in any part of the universe, nor above the universe, and, to speak simply, is nothing at all and in nothing of those things which in any way, as it is true, are seen or comprehended, or spoken ^D of, or thought, or can be known in any way, pushing aside the opinion from all of these that the essence of God can be comprehended as to what it is. Then, inciting them more urgently toward piety, and wishing to show that it is not permitted for anyone to think, much less to express, anything at all about God in a rash way, based on the investigation of lower things which are incomparably distant from God, he says these things. And indeed, also for the establishing of those things which he had already argued against them privatively and negatively, so that, having been admonished thereby—that even the accurate comprehension of the least things in created objects surpasses the faculty of our local rational power—they might be able to restrain the impulse of much greater rashness and audacity, after having learned the weakness of nature in small things. For indeed, if we inquire about some figure, [188b] whether in man, or horse, or ox, to comprehend the figure fully, it is not enough to have said "body," or "that which is generable," or "that which is subject to destruction."

^A nature is not met. For if those searching for a foundational element for us—let us say, for example, either man or horse or ox—it is not sufficient for a perfect apprehension to call the element "body," or only "generated" or "corruptible," regarding man or ox or horse; rather, it is necessary to present also that which underlies these, which is generated and corrupted and qualified. But body or generation or corruption in no way exists as ^B the underlying subject, since there would follow from this a necessity: if anything is a body, then it is an element; and if anything is generated or corruptible, it is either man or ox or horse. For it is not the case that if anything is a body, it is by necessity also an element or a man or an ox or a horse. For if anything is an element, it is by necessity also a body, but it is not the case that if anything is a body, it is by necessity also an element. Nor if anything is a body or generated or corruptible, is it by necessity also a man; since in that way, every thing that is a body, and every thing that is generated or corruptible, would by necessity also be a man. For if anything is a man, it is by necessity also a body and generated and corrupted, but it is not the case that if anything is a body or generated or corruptible, it is by necessity also a man. For it does not at all follow that since there is a man, there must by necessity be a foundational element and an ox and a horse, and everything else that is corporeal and generated and corrupted. For particular things are never predicated of universals, nor species of genera, nor content of the containers; and for this reason, universals do not convert with particulars, nor genera with species, nor common things with specific things, nor, to sum it up, do the containers convert with the things contained. Thus, therefore, according to the explanation given, the same must be determined concerning the ox and the horse and everything else ^C whatsoever. Therefore, it is not sufficient for the perfect knowledge of things to enumerate the many properties that are observed regarding them—I mean body, and being generated and corrupted, and whatever else of this kind accompanies the underlying subject—but it is also absolutely necessary to point out what the underlying subject of these properties is, as the foundation upon which these things stand, if we wish to represent perfectly and fully what is being thought. For we must either speak of man or ox or horse—these things now being not this body itself, but corporeal things, and not being these very things, generation and corruption, but things generated and perishing—so that it is these—I speak of body and generation and corruption—that clearly accompany the animals, but it is not these—body, I say, and generation and corruption—that exist as the animals themselves.

Therefore, if the totality of existing things is not, in its very ^D essence—that is, the collection of the things that are thought and said by us regarding it—what it is and is called, but is something other than these, which is that which accompanies these, preserving and containing them, while it itself is in no way contained or preserved by these (for that regarding which these things both are and are said is not from these, nor are these, nor any of them, nor from some of them, nor of any of them, nor in these, nor in some, nor in any of these, that which is in relation to these exists and is said to be), let every soul cease from the foolish habit of boldly leaping toward the things regarding God for no reason, and having learned its own proper

^A For not even the accurate perception of creation, as the saint previously taught, is contained by our knowledge according to the truth of the Word, so that I, too, might linger a little while in my discourse and marvel at the inscrutable nature of the wisdom that is above all things. For who among those who are most wise, trusting in rational approaches and non-existent proofs, will be able, by means of reason, to approach, discern, describe, and demonstrate the greatness of things that exist? What are the primordial reasons implanted in the existence of each of the things that exist, according to which each thing both is and possesses a nature, and has obtained form and species, and is composite, and is able to act and be acted upon—not to mention the difference and property of quantity, quality, affection, place, time, position, motion, and habit, toward which also our own magnificently rational faculty naturally and equally spreads out into mind, thought, conception, deliberation, cogitation, and the word conceived in the mind, and the spoken and sounding word, that is, voice and cry, and again gathers itself back together, apart from the knowledge and art that understands, just as in the case of quantity and quality and the rest, as I have enumerated, its difference and property? ^B Who is it that knows the reasons of things that exist, as they are, as I said, and how they differ, and how they possess an immovable state according to nature and a motion that does not at all shift toward one another—having in motion, state, and in state, surprisingly, motion? What is the bond between opposites for the constitution of a single world, and what is the mode of their orderly and unconfused motion and governance? And again, what in our bodies is the composition and nexus of opposites according to their mixture, which compels those things that are naturally distant into a familiar dwelling together, and which, through the mediation of the extremities, softens their austerity, enables them to pass through one another without harm, and establishes this stability of composite things—the return and congress of the extremities into one another according to their mixture? And how is each of these things, and what is it, and where is it carrying or being carried, and for what purpose has it come to be, or what is it carrying or being carried, not only, as has been said, by the reasons in which these things exist from the beginning, but also by the infinite ways in which they are discerned and united toward themselves and toward one another in thought and action? ^C And again, what is the reason for the essence, nature, species, form, composition, faculty, action, and passion of each and every one of them? And what, then, is the general reason that works according to the end of each, through the middle, the mutual connection of the extremities toward one another, so that both the mind and the object of thought, through the intermediate conception—which is a unifying relation of the things divided concerning the thought derived from both—might be joined and comprehended with one another, and nothing whatsoever ^D

among those things which are after God might be shown to be lacking in circumscription? Just as all sensible things, and the things that perceive—that is, the sensible—are, through the intermediate perception (which is a common affection of the distant extremities), joined: for the sensible things are perceived through it by the perceivers, and the perceivers are joined to the sensible things through it, around the instrument of perception where the limit of each faculty's affection is placed, and around which the extremities are naturally united through the intermediate affection or relation. ^B When we attempt to investigate the reasons for these things—or for any one of them—we remain completely weak and mute in our explanation, having nothing upon which we might accurately fix our mind, except for the divine power. And this is what the saint meant, I think, as he trains our mind toward piety: “At least by little and little, not even the accurate understanding of creation [is possible].” And that which follows: “But far before these, that nature which is above these, and from which these have their origin, is ungraspable and incomprehensible,” must be understood as applying in common to the creation and to that nature which is above these, and from which these—namely, the creatures—have their origin, that is, the nature which is “ungraspable and incomprehensible.” And the addition, “Not *that* it is, but *what* it is,” is an anticipation of a secondary objection. For, so that he might not run into a discourse that says, “If that which we worship and venerate is totally ungraspable, then the preaching of Christians is empty, and their faith is empty, since it is supported by nothing,” ^C he says these things, forestalling the detractor, whether it be a line of reasoning or a person. He did not say that this nature, concerning which the discussion exists, is ungraspable in *that* it exists, but in what it is; and he adds, to confirm his reasoning: “For it differs much to be persuaded that something exists, and to know what this thing is,” that is, there is a great difference between being persuaded about something that it exists, and possessing an accurate comprehension of its essence. Do not, therefore, he says, when we in good faith say that the divine essence is ungraspable, maliciously twist the argument to imply that we are saying it is ungraspable in its very existence, and from this conclude that we profess an absolute atheism. And after a little, he says: “For what will you conceive God to be, if you trust entirely to rational approaches (that is, if you think that, by circling the matter with logic, you are able to enclose the object of your search in some kind of knowledge)? ^D Is it a body (that is, 'Is it a body?')? And how, then, could that which is infinite and boundless and unshapely, and untouchable and invisible, be so (that is, a body)?”—so that, by being explained and thought out, it might be understood, as the common notions prevail, that God is infinite, which is to say, that He has no limit. For this [notion of having no limit] is peculiar to that which is distinguished by four limits: point, and line, surface, and solid, besides also three

distantiis, that is, length, breadth, and depth, and to those [three] themselves as distinguished by limits, ^A each one of which is clearly bounded by two: length by the upper and lower; breadth by the right and left; depth by the anterior limit and the posterior. And again, since the same common notions insinuate that God is indefinite—that is, that He does not permit a full explanation of what constitutes His subject, nor does He admit of placement in a place, or beginning or end within time; furthermore, that He is without figure, as He is not spherical, nor quadrangular, nor erect, nor downward-leaning; and indeed, also that He is intangible and invisible, as He does not fall under sense perception (for these are properties of bodies)—it is absurd to conclude from those things which we have overturned that the divine is body, and that it necessarily has to be divided into as many parts, into which, again, like body, it would be gathered together. For God is altogether indivisible, and altogether devoid of quantity; and devoid of quantity, because He is altogether devoid of quality; and devoid of quality, because He is altogether simple; and simple, because He is altogether without distance. And He is altogether without distance, because He is utterly infinite; and He is utterly infinite, because He is utterly ^B immobile (for that which has nowhere to move cannot move at all); and immobile, because He is altogether devoid of beginning (for He has nothing before Him or greater, nothing equal to Himself, nothing after Him, which could compare to or comprehend Him); and He is devoid of beginning, because He is altogether unbegotten; and unbegotten, because He is altogether one and alone; and one and alone, because He is altogether devoid of affection and relation; and on this account He is utterly ineffable and unknown, and the end of all knowledge for those who are properly and fittingly moved toward God is that He cannot be known.

From the same discourse, on the words: «For if that which is not is nowhere, it perhaps does not even exist. But if you say that it is somewhere, it is without doubt, since it is, either in the universe or above the universe.»

For this reason, a hearer might perhaps ask, why did the master introduce a dubious inversion by adding the adverb «perhaps»? ^C when, regarding rational suppositions, no one doubts that it is right to grant that that which is nowhere has no existence at all. To this, according to the poverty of our intelligence, we shall respond that he, desiring to restrain the madness of Eunomius and his disciples—who boasted of knowing God just as He knows Himself—reduced them to an absurd position by such statements. For when they claim to know God just as He knows Himself, they necessarily maintain that they must also add where He is whom they know, into a full comprehension of the known, and thus, according to them, God differs not at all ^D from any of existing things, [being] unique, and having unique true knowledge, namely that He cannot be known.

^A What could be more absurd than for them to say that He is not somewhere, or even to say that He does not exist at all, according to the hypothesis of their own argument; for what could be more godless? For how, if He does not exist absolutely somewhere, could He have the [quality of] existence? Or does the sequence of the argument compel them to say that He exists necessarily, but that He is nowhere? And because of this, [they must say that] He is and exists, but they do not know what He is or how He exists. If, according to them, the fact that the Divine is [somewhere] is unknown, much more will the Divine itself—whatever it is according to essence—be unknown. Therefore, if they wish to act religiously and piously, they must agree that what is unknown is not anywhere at all. For this reason, as I think, the teacher, accommodating himself to those around Eunomius, employed the reversal ^B by inserting the adverb "perhaps," and left it for us to consider, [namely] that he by no means denies that what exists nowhere exists at all. For we say that God exists; yet [we say] that He is nowhere, because He is not circumscribed essentially according to substance as if in a place, and [we say] that He exists absolutely, because He does not at all stand in need of the whole totality of things that are for His existence—things without which He both was, and is, and will be able to exist always, or rather, He always is. For He does not have His position from those things that are, He who existed even before the things that are. For if, among us, those who are craftsmen in their own crafts do not possess substantial existence for that which is circumscribed—this corruptible thing, which might more truthfully and properly be said to never exist at all—what, I ask, would one say concerning that ineffable and unknown [power], which is equal to all and always exists in the same power? ^C

From the same discourse, on the words: "Whether it was some diurnal phantom, or a non-deceptive vision of the night, or an impression of the governing faculty, showing the future as if it were present."

This blessed Father, having been completely purified from the things with which the nature of men is accustomed to be stained through what is called practical philosophy, ^D and having had his mind wholly qualified by the Holy Spirit for the contemplation of divine dogmas, through the true initiation into knowledge—having indeed suffered things equal to the holy prophets—enumerated the kinds of prophecy for us in these [words]. Since it seems useful, after what has been so magnificently and divinely said—and which transcends the ability of all who are not such as the teacher himself was—to dare at least to undertake an interpretation, this must be done conjecturally and not assertively. I think, therefore, to state conjecturally, according to my own dim-sightedness, that he called a "diurnal phantom" the appearance and resonance of words and events, heard and seen spiritually by the holy men as if through [the medium of] sense. For it is not permitted to say regarding divine things that a miracle must necessarily be present for the impression of an image, but [that it happens] in a marvelous and extraordinary way, and...

^A even when the person is not present and sensible voices are not sounding through the air, it works an imagination, so that one who is being initiated into divine mysteries may truly hear and see. For every imagination is either of present things or of past things; but it is in no way [an imagination] of things that have not yet come to pass. For it is a state that mediates between extremes through itself. By extremes I mean the faculty of imagination and the object of imagination, from which, through the middle [stage] of imagination—which is the state and relation of the extremes—the image comes into being, acting as the limit of activity and passivity: activity, indeed, of the imaginative faculty, and passivity of the object of imagination, with the extremes being connected one to another through the middle [stage] of the imagination, which is their state concerning it. For everything that perceives certain things through anything is said to act, and everything that is subject to others in any way is said to suffer. Therefore, those that perceive act naturally, and those that are perceived suffer naturally, having as the limit of their passivity and activity the connection they have with one another through the middle. For this reason, I think it is not appropriate to suppose that in divine matters the object of imagination is not present, since it is no longer about to be present; it is already present in a business-like way according to its own ^B substance, and at the same time it is not believed to be divine, having nothing more than natural sequence. For if we, imagining things at night during sleep, both see and hear, often when no one is present who is speaking or being seen, much more will the saints, truly awake, suffer this, with God working in them while they are awake through a certain marvelous grace—that which we are accustomed to suffer by the law of nature during sleep.

"I suspect he calls 'the true night vision' either that accurate apprehension of future events that occurs by the soul in dreams, as happened to Joseph and Daniel, or a certain vision of divine things that comes to the eyes of the saints' flesh, as a result of that extreme impassibility which is born from the highest plenitude of purity and innocence. And I suspect that by 'the impression of the governing faculty' he means the ^C images of future things that appear to the saints in a singular way, through a certain simple and unextended application of the intellect, just like an image. For my part, I have dared to speak these things conjecturally, not having obtained the grace of experiencing such things, but because of the command of him who enjoined this task upon me. But if anyone who has obtained this grace happens upon this writing of mine, whatever it may be, I pray that he does not reproach me for presumption, but rather that he shows approval for my obedience, even if this argument has no power to demonstrate the sum and pivot of the matters proposed." ^D

From the same discourse, on the passage: "But if it had been permitted for Paul to make known those things which the third heaven, and the progress, or ascent, or assumption as far as to it, exhibited."

Those who have wisely mastered the divine discourses say...

^A that of nouns, if we wish to grasp them, one part belongs to substance, one part to relation, and one part to grace or to destruction. For instance, those of substance are such as when they say "a man." Those of relation are such as when they say "a good," or "a holy," or "a wise man," or the opposite, "a bad man," or "an unwise," or "a defiled" (for relation denotes that which has a certain reference to things that are diametrically opposed to one another, and rightly calls the volitional habit thus conceived internally by those things which it possesses). Those of grace are such as when man is called God in ^B discourses, having become a man who is in all things obedient to God, according to that word: "I have said: You are gods," having the state of being or being called God neither by nature nor by relation, but having become and being called so by position and grace. For grace is altogether devoid of such position, not having any power in nature capable of receiving it, since it would no longer be grace, but a manifestation of an operation according to natural power. And thus, again, it would not be strange if what comes to be were through a power in nature capable of receiving it. For deification would reasonably be a work of nature, and not a gift of God, and such a one would be able to exist [(194 a)] and to be called God by nature and properly. For the power of ^C each of the things that exist according to nature is nothing other than the indefectible movement of nature toward operation. But how deification makes the one being deified to be outside himself, if it were comprehended within the bounds of nature, I cannot understand. In the same way, they also call those who have established for themselves that which is not [the good] according to a disposition, and who have become through their ways in all things similar to it, "destruction" and "hell" and "sons of destruction" and the like. I believe, therefore, that this holy and great teacher, having turned his mind to the things mentioned above, arranged the rapture of the holy Apostle mentioned there, ^D fittingly distributing to each the appropriate word. Wherefore, I suspect him to call "progression" the impassibility according to habit of virtue which placed the holy Apostle outside natural necessity, according to which he chose to have no relation of volition to nature, since he was established outside even that natural activity according to sense, or rather, had converted this also into a spiritual habit; and "ascent" as the abandonment of all sensible things, which no longer acted or were acted upon in him according to sense, and the transgression of the gnostic contemplation in the spirit regarding them according to nature; and "assumption" as the remaining and establishment in God that happened to him after this, which the teacher fitly called "assumption," showing that the Apostle suffered rather than acted the assumption. For assumption is a passion of the one being assumed, but an operation of the one assuming. Of these, therefore, natural and relative names, [(194 b)] the Apostle was master, having transcended the appellation according to both nature and relation, having become beyond nature and virtue and human knowledge.

^A For the more infinitely he was stripped of the divine name, by so much the more did he participate in the calling by grace, ^B becoming and being called God, instead of every other name that is naturally and relatively attributed, by [the] assumption. Or again in this way: "Progression" is the complete renunciation of nature according to virtue; "ascension" is the surpassing of those things in which nature exists—I mean place and time—in which the subsistence of beings consists; "assumption" is the restoration, by grace, to Him from whom, through whom, and in whom all things are, as unto the end of all things. And to say it otherwise: "progression" is the guidance of his disciples into virtue through practical philosophy, as the Apostle is their teacher; for in all things the teacher must precede the disciples toward the performance of due actions. "Ascension" is the expert comprehension of the reasons of the things that inhabit the world, through natural contemplation. "Assumption" is the pious initiation into true and theological wisdom, which cannot be expressed in words as to what it is. I suspect that the "third heaven" ^C is the circumscriptive limits of practical philosophy and natural contemplation and the highest reasons of theological initiation, or rather their boundaries; since there is a certain measure of the comprehension of virtue and nature and the theology situated in both, adapted by God to each of the things that exist according to their nature, in which boundaries and limits the blessed Apostle, having surpassed the reasons of the aforementioned things as far as he was able, made his way. For if the heaven is a description of the things contained within it according to nature, and the limit of all things that are subject to sense, it is clear that, according to the principle of anagogical reasons, every termination that describes the reasons concerning any virtue or knowledge is, as a limit of the things being defined and a boundary of the things being circumscribed, ^D figuratively called "heaven." Or again, perhaps Scripture calls the "third heaven" the three ranks of the holy angels which ascend in order from us toward what is above—to which holy Paul perhaps passed through, being initiated into the affirmations of the knowledge of them through the negations of his own, and imitating their habits through the privations of his own that correspond in excellence. For every nature of rational beings, according to its own order and power, is initiated into and imitates the gnostic habits and positions and affirmations that are superior to the substance and order of that nature, through privative and ablative negations. And the affirmation according to knowledge of the things which are superior is the negation of those which are subjected beneath, and conversely, the negation according to knowledge of those which are subjected is the affirmation of those which are superior, proceeding negatively up to the unique, supreme nature and order of all, which, after all orders and powers, the immediate negation concerning God in knowledge follows, affirmed by nothing at all among beings, there being henceforth no limit or boundary encompassing this negation. For just as the intelligible things are by nature the negation of the sensible, so also in the substances and powers that complete the world above, the negations of the primary things according to the knowledge concerning God

^A are affirmed by none at all of those things that exist, nor does any other end or limit exist that might comprehend this negation. For just as the negations of sensible things, according to their nature, are the intelligible things, so also among those essences and powers that fill the superior world, the things that are primary according to the knowledge of God are negated because of their submission to those things that are after them. For just as things that we cannot understand are understood by the holy angels who surpass us, so also those things that have not been understood by us are understood by the holy angels who surpass us, and those things that surpass them are understood by the holy angels who surpass those, and thus, following the order upward from power to power, the intellect, rising and surpassing all ranks and powers, terminates in that which is ineffable, unthinkable, and utterly unknown.

If, therefore, according to Dionysius the Areopagite, negations in divine matters are true, while affirmations are unsuited to the hiddenness of the ineffable, then the divine Apostle, having denied the intellect of all his knowledge and having surpassed all relationship to the things that exist, neither ^B in the body, as he said, was he plausibly seen to be—since he did not have an active sense—nor again outside the body, having an intellect that is dormant during the time of the raptures that happened to him, during which, in an ineffable and unknown manner, he received certain words according to a heavenly initiation, which, honoring them in silence, he kept entirely unuttered, as neither mind was able to understand, nor tongue to speak, nor ear to receive them.

It is said, furthermore, by those who are experienced, that it makes the perfect action in the aforementioned "procession" of virtue to be right faith and uncorrupted fear toward God; and in the "ascent," the unerring natural contemplation to be firm hope and unsullied conscience; and in the "assumption" (theosis), perfect love and an intellect ^C that is utterly and voluntarily blinded to all things that exist, because of their preeminence. And they say that the task of practical philosophy is to render the intellect innocent of every passionate imagination and worldly pomp; that of natural contemplation is to imbue it with true knowledge of every cause of the things that exist; and that of theological initiation is to render it, as far as is possible by grace according to habit, equal and peer to God, so that it might now be utterly ignorant of all things after God because of His preeminence.

^D From the same discourse, on the words: "Nor could the lower world contain him," John, the forerunner of the Word, the great voice of the truth, declared it.

It was opportune that I also, toward this holy and great teacher of truth, seeing the magnitude of the wisdom given to him by God, should speak just as David, the most distinguished of prophets and kings, did toward God; being amazed at the infinity of His majesty in all things, he spoke in a divinely inspired manner, saying: "Your knowledge has become too wonderful for me,"

I would not be able to apprehend it as is right, especially by merely describing the indescribable power with wonder, having nowhere else to rest the multifaceted activity of the soul concerning things unattainable. And for me, as I said, it is enough to have obtained sanctification of the understanding from the wonder of the wise teacher, and not to inquire curiously how and for what reason the divine voice, in a manner mystical to the saints, has interchanged the names contrary to history, calling John, the son of thunder, a forerunner [196 B] here.

Since the reward for obedience is great—whereby we are especially commanded to be compliant to our superiors, and to find leisure, and to know, and to search the Scriptures, and to meditate on the divine law day and night—and since I recognized that this is especially incumbent upon those who are well-disposed, I, fearing the danger of hesitation and disobedience, will state my conjecture concerning these matters to the best of my ability, relying upon your prayers, which have laid this task upon me. I think, therefore, that this divine teacher said something contrary to history when he designated the forerunner of Christ instead of the Son of Thunder, an expression which cannot be smoothed over except through contemplation, which is the only way to reconcile those things that seem to contradict each other in the historical account; for it demonstrates the truth, which is simple in all things according to nature, incorporeally, not concreted by voices or bodies.

Just as, therefore, the great John the Baptist was called a forerunner with respect to Him who was truly expected, and a Voice with respect to the Word, as one who went before His proclamation, and a lamp with respect to the sun, as an artificial, positional, and temporal light with respect to the natural, essential, unartificial, eternal, and unquenchable light—and I believe also as repentance, proclaiming that the righteousness which existed before it by nature came to be after it according to the dispensation—so I also imagine that this God-minded teacher, in calling the great apostle John a forerunner contrary to history, wishes to signify that John the great evangelist, in his own Gospel, is a forerunner [197 A] of the more mystical and greater Word revealed through him, which can neither be expressed in words nor uttered by the voice of fleshly language.

For the writing of the holy Gospels is an instruction toward the knowledge that is always obtained by those who are exalted through them and who spiritually purge themselves of the thickness of carnal wisdom, or toward that which will be obtained in the future, after the consummation of those things that are moved. For just as the Law was an instruction, through the temporal knowledge that appeared in it, of those who were being led by it unto Christ, the Word made flesh, and gathered together by the Gospel at the time of His first advent; so too the holy Gospel is an instruction of those who through it are being led unto Christ, the spiritual Word, and gathered together for the world to come at the time of His second coming; for since flesh and spirit

^A are the same in relation to each according to the suitability of knowledge, it becomes this or that, because all speech is subject to words and letters.

I dare even to say that whatever is thought, which can be imprinted upon the mind, does not differ from the instruction that teaches the things which are superior to it. This is why the Gospels are four in number, as they are for the time being perceptible to those who are still subject to sense and decay. For the elements of this world are also this many, and there are four virtues from which the spiritual world—according to the intellect—is constituted, so that the word of truth may encompass the intelligible world within us and the one in which we dwell, and may bring them together into union with one another without confusion, and yet distinguish them from one another without division, by the likenesses of the elements that constitute them.

For what, as they say, the ether is—that is, the fiery element—in the sensible world, that is prudence in the world of the intellect, as a habit which is illuminating and which demonstrates the spiritual reasons specifically inherent in each of the things that exist, revealing through them the cause of all things without error, and drawing and leading the soul's desire towards the Divine. And what air is in the sensible world, that in the world of the intellect is fortitude, as a moving habit, both preserving and acting as a vital force for the life that is spiritually inborn, and cutting through the soul’s immobility regarding the Divine. And what water is in the sensible world, that in the world of the intellect is temperance, a habit which is the producer of vital fruitfulness in the Spirit, and the begetter of the amorous attraction which enjoys the perpetual desire for the Divine. And what earth is in the sensible world, that in the world of the intellect is justice, a habit which in its form is the producer of all the reasons within those things that exist, and the distributor of the vital distribution in the Spirit to each according to equality, and the unchangeable establishment of our own base in the good through counsel and will.

Therefore, the Gospel according to Matthew holds the place of earth and justice mystically, as it conducts the discourse more naturally; that according to Mark, of water and temperance, as it begins from the baptism of John and the repentance preached by him, by which temperance consists; that according to Luke, of air and fortitude, as it is more comprehensive and crowded with more narratives; and that according to John, of ether and prudence, as it is superior to all and introduces mystically the simple faith and understanding concerning God.

They also say that in another way the quaternion of the holy Gospels is a symbol of faith: of practical or active philosophy, and of natural and theological philosophy. And that the Gospel according to Matthew is the symbol of faith, as it introduces the Magi who, while unbelievers, worship with gifts; that of Mark of practical or active philosophy, as it institutes discipline from repentance, which every action of virtue follows; that of natural philosophy, the Gospel according to Luke, as it has the exposition of the word more comprehensively and the history of doctrine ^D

^A in a manner congruous and agreeable; and that of theology, the Gospel according to John, from which and into which, in a manner worthy of God, he both began and ended.

And again, just as the sensible world is by nature the instructor of the five senses, being subject to them and leading them to the apprehension of itself, so too is the intellectual world of virtues; for by being subject to the powers of the soul, it instructs them toward the Spirit, making them uniform, commanding them to be moved only in relation to It and to rest upon those perceptions which are of It. And they say that the very senses of the body, according to a more divine reason appropriate to them, are also instructors of the powers of the soul, gently composing these powers toward operation, by their own perceptions of the reasons that exist in beings, through which, as through certain letters, God the Word is read by those who direct the gaze of their eyes toward the truth. Whence they also called the senses ^B exemplary images of the psychic powers, since each sense, together with its own instrument—that is, its sensory organ—is primarily and [198 b] proportionally distributed to each power of the soul, according to a more mystical reason, by nature. And they say that the visual sense belongs to the intellectual power, or the mind; the auditory sense to the rational power, or the reason; the olfactory sense to the irascible power; the gustatory sense to the concupiscible power; and the tactile sense to the vital power. And simply, that I may speak more clearly: the image of the mind is sight, that is, the eye; of the reason is hearing, that is, the ear; of the irascible is smell, that is, the nose; of the desire is taste; and of the life is touch. Upon these, the soul—according to the law of God who wisely created all things—naturally leaning through its own powers, and being variously led toward sensible things, if it should make good use of the senses to gather the manifold reasons of things through its own powers, and should be able to wisely transfer to itself all those things lying before the eyes in which God lies hidden as a silent herald, it also, by the will, constructs within the intellect a most beautiful and spiritual world, having joined together the four general virtues after the manner of elements one to another for the compacting of the world which is intelligibly fulfilled from them in the Spirit; for ^C it establishes each virtue through the conjunction of the operation of its own powers toward the senses. For instance, prudence is established from the conjunction of the intellectual and rational power toward the visual and auditory sense, concerning their sensible objects, through a cognitive and scientific operation; fortitude from the conjunction of the irascible power toward the sense of smell—that is, the nose, in which they say the irascible spirit dwells—concerning the connate sensible object, according to the equality of the operation; [199 a] temperance from the conjunction of the concupiscible power toward the gustatory sense, according to the moderate use of its sensible object; and justice from the equal, ordered, and, in all things, balanced distribution by the tactile sense concerning almost all sensible things, according to the operation of the vital power. From these general virtues again, temperance [is established] from the

four virtues, and it learns to make two more general virtues in terms of composition: I mean wisdom and gentleness—wisdom, which is the end of objects of knowledge, and gentleness, which is the end of objects of action. For from prudence and justice it effects wisdom, which is the preserving cause of the knowledge from prudence and of the skill from justice, and therefore, as I said, it is the end of objects of knowledge. And from fortitude and temperance it effects gentleness, which is nothing other than the complete immobility of the irascible and concupiscible powers toward things contrary to nature—which some have called apathy—and therefore it is the end of objects of action. ^B It draws these again into the most general of all virtues, I mean love, which is ecstatic for those who are from it, and introductory for those who are through it, and unifying for those who have begun and moved and ended in it, and especially, above all, divinizing. Thus, therefore, the soul, moving wisely and acting according to the divine rationale by which it exists and has been made, perceives sensible things usefully through the senses, making the spiritual rationales within them its own; and the senses themselves, having been calculated by the abundance of the Word, it offers as rational vehicles of its own powers. It joins these powers themselves to the virtues, and joins itself, through the virtues, to the more divine rationales within them; and the more divine rationales of the virtues [it joins] to the spiritual intellect that lies hidden secretly within them. ^C But the spiritual intellect, removing every natural affection and relation of the soul that it has toward present things, surrenders it, simple and whole, to the whole God. And God, having embraced it entirely together with the body with which it is connatural, fittingly makes both like to Himself, so that through it, being whole, He who is in His nature entirely uncircumscribed for any of existing things in any respect whatsoever might be capable of appearing [so that He is] whole—He who by nature does not appear of Himself in any way at all to anything that exists. And this is perhaps what that blessed and great teacher had in mind when he said in the *Epitaph* for his brother Caesarius: "After some time"—that is, after the resurrection—"when it has received back from the earth, which both had given and had received in trust (how this will be, God knows, who joined them and dissolved them), the kindred flesh—I mean, speaking of the soul, which had been its companion while it philosophized here—then at last it will also admit it to the inheritance of celestial glory with itself. ^D And just as, on account of their natural conjunction, it had shared in its troubles, so also it will share its delights with it, having absorbed the whole body into itself and having become one with it—and spirit, and mind, and God—the mortal and corruptible having been absorbed by life." For just as through sin the flesh had been absorbed by destruction, and by the flesh the soul was recognized from its actions, and by the soul [there was] full ignorance of the knowledge of God, to such a degree that it was even ignorant of whether God existed, so now

^A in the time of the resurrection, according to the beautiful inversion that will occur in the Holy Spirit by the grace of God who became flesh, the flesh will be absorbed by the soul in the Spirit, and the soul by God, who is the true life, having Him alone and uniquely as the one appearing in all things to the whole, and, to speak simply, in a way inverse to the present things, around which we currently are and abide, the God-befitting grace of the resurrection will reveal all our matters in the future, so that just as death, having grown strong here through sin, swallowed [up], so it will be justly swallowed [up] there, having been weakened by grace. If, then, the soul uses its faculties well, as I have said, and according to the purpose of God, wisely traversing this sensible world through the spiritual reasons [logoi] within it, it will arrive at God with understanding; but if it uses them badly, traversing the present world beyond the fitting reason, having perhaps slipped secretly into the affect of infamy, it will deservedly be cast out of the divine glory in the future, and will be condemned by the terrible sentence of judgment to infinite eternities, losing every bond and nexus with God—a sentence into which, if it clothes itself, it will have no cause to say it suffers an injustice, since it possesses an accuser representing the affect of the Non-existent, which it can never ignore. But the discourse must be recalled to the matter at hand. For since the evangelist says: "There are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were to be written one by one, I suppose not even the world itself could contain the books that would be written," ^C he revealed to us through these that the things written by him are a certain preparatory smoothing toward a more perfect and as yet [(200 b)] inaccessible Word. Therefore, if one were to call the holy evangelist John a forerunner, in the Gospel which he composed to prepare a path for the intellect to receive the more perfect Word, he will not err from the truth. Thus, too, the teacher calls him who thundered spiritual things the great voice of the truth. Now, thunder is a voice creating only terror for the hearers, rendering nothing, however, clear, such as is the elemental word. For every word written divinely for men in this age is a forerunner of the more perfect Word which, without the help of any letters, is revealed by itself in the spirit to the mind, and which will appear in the future, having truth revealed within itself, but not showing it naked in its envelope. Thus, therefore, as I think, the mind of the entire divine Scripture, piously smoothed out, will be shown to have nothing difficult or uneven in those things which, according to history, seem to be contrary to one another. For each one of the ancient saints...

^A was a forerunner of that mystery which was signified and prefigured through him, proclaiming by what he suffered and did and said the original archetypes of these things. Hence, they are rightly and irreproachably taken one for another; and all for all, and each for each; and, in the usage of Scripture, the books are called by their names, and they themselves are called by the names of the books. This is clearly shown by the Lord, who both makes and calls John the Baptist "Elias"—whether because of an equal habit of virtue, as the disciples say, and purity of mind in all things, and the intensity of his manner of life; or because of the identity of the power of grace in both; or because of some other hidden reason which He, who spoke as God, would know, even as those who were taught such mysteries by Him. And again, ^B He calls the law "Moses" and the prophetic books "the prophets," where He introduces the patriarch Abraham saying to the rich man tormented and vexed in hell: *"They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them"* (Luc. xvi, 29), putting those men themselves—I say, Moses and the prophets—in place of the divine books written by them. And this is no wonder. For if He who is proclaimed through them is one, all can be understood as the one whom they proclaim; and each for all and all for all can be piously accepted, both those who ministered to the mystery under the Old Testament and those to whom the preaching of the grace of the Gospel was entrusted. Therefore, just as the great Baptist John can piously be taken for the ^C whole of the New Testament and the worship according to it, so justly may the great John, being a forerunner of the mystical concealment of the ineffable goods in the age to come, be taken for the whole of the New Testament and the worship according to it, as a forerunner-voice of the more divine Word clearly to be spoken in the future, and as an image of the truth that is to be shown. For the whole mystery of our salvation has been wisely dispensed by shadow, and image, and truth. For the law had a shadow, as the divine Apostle says, of *the good things to come, not the very image of the things* (Hebr. x, 1), through which the Word instructed the observers of the law, in their own appropriate way, by a certain obscure intimation of the truths, toward the reception of the Gospel. But the Gospel possesses the image of the truths, clearly holding those who have already attained from ^D this point a likeness of the good things to come. The Word makes us ready, through hope, for the reception of the archetype of the truths, so that we may be quickened and become living images of Christ—nay, rather, the same as He by grace, or even an imitation of Him, or perhaps even the Lord Himself, if this saying does not seem too harsh to some. Just as He has now been called a forerunner of Himself by the divine teacher, having shown Himself to those who receive Him according to what he had received from both the Old and New Testaments, a forerunner of Himself through riddles and voices and images, and through these leading those to whom He was revealed to the truth—a fact to which the Lord's own words bear witness, when He said: *I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.*

S: MAXIMI CONFESSORIS

bajulare, showing the disciples a teaching ^A that was higher than that which had preceded it, but lower than that which was to be theirs after it through the divine Spirit. Whence, if I am not mistaken, he added: "But when that Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth;" or what he says elsewhere: "Behold, I am with you all the days even unto the consummation of the age." Not that he would afterward be altogether absent from them, but because he was to be higher than what they had known as lower up to that time, being something they would recognize as their capacity for understanding increased. For the Same, always existing by himself, admitting no change from alteration, nor any increase or decrease in greater or lesser degree, becomes all things to all men through the superabundance of his goodness: humble to the humble, high to the high, and, to those who are deified through him, he is by nature God, insomuch that all the forms and mysteries of the present age concerning the providence of man, are but a preparation ^B and preliminary description of things to come. Therefore, even the Lord's word, which is currently graspable, when compared with that which will one day be given to the disciples more mystically, and his first coming compared with his second, is thus a precursor of itself, obscurely showing in itself what it can according to the faculty of its hearers, yet not currently revealing the mysteries which he holds silently in secret with himself, because they are currently altogether imperceptible to the present condition. For whatever is subject to letters and voices, as I have said, cannot but direct its own intellect—or if it be something spiritual, insofar as it does not at all fall into letters and speech—as if toward a manifest and clear word. And therefore, John—this divine teacher perhaps so named the grace of the precursor—because he was apt to receive it ^C beautifully and wisely, naming it accordingly regarding all that was said by Christ God to his disciples toward the ineffable intellect, that is, apprehension.

From the same discourse, on that which says: "The discourse that is undertaken about God, by how much the more perfect it is, by that much it is the more difficult, and lies open to more objections, and causes more trouble in clarifying and dissolving them."

(202 b) If the things that have been made are many, those that have been made differ also in every way, if indeed they are many. For it is not possible that things which are many should not also be diverse. And if the many are diverse, the reasons by which they exist according to essence ^D must also be understood as diverse, by which and because of which the things that differ differ the more; for those things that differ would not differ from one another unless the reasons by which they have been made also possessed diversity. If, therefore, just as the senses are naturally

receiving sensible objects, of necessity they produce many and diverse perceptions of the things that underlie and fall under them, so also the mind, naturally perceiving the reasons within all things—in which, as they are infinite, it makes many and infinite (to speak truly) differences of the divine actions that it perceives—will naturally possess a weak power and an impassable method for the scientific investigation of that which truly is. For it is unable to understand how, in the reason of each thing by itself, and in the reasons of all things together in which all things exist, God—who is not numbered among the things that are, and who is all things properly, and is above all things—might be. If, therefore, every divine action, according to true reason, signifies God undivided, whole through himself, in each thing according to the specific reason by which He is in it, who is it who can accurately understand and say how God is in all things commonly, as a whole, and in each of the things that are, individually, being devoid of parts and indivisible, neither ^A being variously distributed along with the infinite differences of the things in which He is present as Being, nor being contracted according to the peculiar existence of each single thing, nor contracting the differences of the things that are according to the one singular totality of all things, but is truly all things in all things, He who never departs from His own simple indivisibility? ^B Well, therefore, did the teacher say that the perceptions of the reason concerning the Godhead are many, from which we are taught that God is, and the solutions are more laborious, from which, in turn, we learn what He is not, in order to turn away from useless and harmful curiosity those who think they can comprehend the divine by the empty figments of their own minds, to whom not even the ultimate of the things that are can truly be understood according to the reason by which it is and exists. ^C

From the first discourse concerning the Son, on the passage, "Therefore the unity, having moved from the beginning into a duality, settled in the Trinity."

Every thing that moves according to nature moves of necessity by a cause, and every thing that moves by a cause also exists of necessity by a cause; and every thing that exists by a cause and moves by a cause necessarily has as the beginning of its existence the cause through which it exists and from which it was brought into existence, and as the end of its motion the same cause by which it is moved and toward which it hastens. ^D Moreover, every thing that exists and moves by a cause is of necessity created. But if the end of that which is moved is the cause by which it is moved, it is necessary that it be the same as the cause by which it was created and exists. Therefore, there is altogether one cause, as principle and end, for that which in any way exists and moves by nature, through which all that exists and moves both exists and is moved. For, being an active power, it produces the...

things that come to be, as their beginning, and draws them providentially, as their end and limit. ^A Now, if whatever is moved and created exists and is moved by a cause, it follows that whatever has no cause of its existence is neither an effect nor, clearly, movable. For what lacks a cause of its existence does not move at all. If, however, that which lacks a cause also lacks motion, then the Divine—since it has no cause for its existence and is the cause of all things that are—must be totally immobile. How then, one might perhaps ask, does this admirable teacher introduce God into these subjects as if He were movable? We shall answer this by saying that he knew well: the reason that sustains each art, remaining altogether immobile in itself—to use an example—as it is formed in each of the specific shapes belonging to that same art, is said to be moved in that it moves the thing being crafted through itself, ^B rather than in that it appears in the act of moving; or, just as light is said to be moved because it moves the sight to see, while the motive power of the entire sight is properly more a cause than that which is moved, so too the Divine, being clearly immobile in its essence and nature, as it is infinite, unaffected, and indeterminate, is said to be moved as if it were a cognizant reason of the things that are, dwelling within the essences and moving each of the things that exist toward its own end in accordance with the reason by which it is moved, and receiving as cause, without being affected, all that is predicated of those things of which it is the cause. ^C This is the point to be commended, which the divine and great seer, the holy Dionysius the Areopagite, took up in his investigations when he said: "Why do the theologians at one time call the divine Numen love, at another charity, and at another lovable and dear?" He resolves the question with these words: "That which is moved here, moves there;" and to speak more clearly: at one time love is divine and is charity and is moved, at another it is lovable and dear, and it moves toward itself whatever is capable of love and charity; and to speak more openly again: it is moved while it inserts the affection of love and charity into those things that are capable of them, but it moves when nature draws toward itself the appetite of those things that are moved toward it; and again: it moves and is moved, as if thirsting to be thirsted for, and loving to be loved, and liking to be liked. ^D According to this manner, too, the divine-minded Gregory says: "Unity, from the beginning, moved into duality and stood in Trinity." For it moves in the mind that is capable of it, whether angelic or human, by means of it and in it, as it inquires into it; and, to express it more clearly, it instructs it indivisibly in that first impulse concerning the reason of unity, lest a division be brought into the first Cause, but it urges it also to receive His divine and ineffable fecundity, teaching it mystically and secretly that it must never think that this Good is ever barren of reason, wisdom, or sanctifying power, which are of the same essence and subsistence, lest the Divine be supposed to be composed of such things as if they were accidental attributes, and it be believed that these things do not exist eternally. The Godhead is therefore said to be moved as the cause of the examination made according to the manner in which it exists. For without illumination

^A you will never be able to approach the Deity. Again, it is said to be moved also on account of the change in a more perfect manifestation of the reason concerning it, according to Holy Scripture, which begins by professing the Father, and proceeds to profess the Son together with the Father, and to receive the Holy Spirit together with the Father and the Son, and instructs and leads us to the perfect Trinity in a perfect unity—that is, one essence and deity and power and action in three substances, to be worshipped together. ^B Ex eodem sermone, in illud: “Verum aliud, ut puto, est volens, aliud voluntas, aliud gignens, aliud generatio, aliud qui loquitur, aliud sermo, nisi forte temulenti simus: horum enim alterum est is qui movet, alterum velut motus ipse. Non ergo voluntatis est volitum, nec generationis quod genitum est (neque enim hoc prorsus sequitur), nec locutionis quod auditum est, sed volentis et gignentis et loquentis. Quæ in Deo considerantur, supra hæc quoque omnia sunt, utpote cui generatio fortasse sit ipsa gignendi voluntas.” ^C Against the Arians, who throw everything into confusion in order to gain an opportunity to blaspheme the Only-Begotten, and who maintain that the Only-Begotten Son is a Son of the will and not of the Father, the wise teacher says these things, easily demonstrating from this source that every artifice constructed against the truth is to be dissolved. For if we affirm that the faculties of the soul, which one might perhaps say are those that complete its essence, are able indeed to act in that essence in which they exist together, yet that they are not necessarily moved to produce an effect through action unless by the nod of the one who wills; and even if it were granted, by hypothesis, that they have a power of their own to act from natural motion, without the inclination of the one who possesses them—to put it this way—they have no power at all to act effectively from their own impulse. For the work does not necessarily follow the power, if it lacks the inclination of the one whose the power is, which (inclination) contributes to it the end that is in act and in reality, whereas the power by itself is ^D unsubstantial. In vain did they propose the will, which accomplishes nothing apart from the one who has it and wills. And this is what the teacher says. For, it is clear, the willed does not necessarily follow the will, nor the other things follow the rest, without the contribution of the one underlying these, in whom they also exist. If, therefore, you estimate divine things from our human examples, O sirs, then at least, by relying on your own conditions, you must concede that those things which accompany one another according to a middle affection or relation must exist simultaneously—I mean the one willing and the willed, the one begetting and the begotten, which, according to the affection or relation

^A of both—for the affection in both is immutable—the Son generated by generation, according to you, was therefore always coexistent with the begetting Father, who was always Father, since He in no way admits any interval of time between Himself and the begetting Father; and the Son is no longer a Son of will, but of the begetting Father. And these things, he says, let them be spoken from human examples; but those things which are considered in God are even above all these, to whom generation is perhaps the will to beget. He cast doubt on this by the word "perhaps," because the generation of the Son from the Father even surpasses will. For the Son is not separated by will from the Father, nor does the will of the Father in any way anticipate the Son in our thoughts, because the Father did not precede the Son, any more than the intellect precedes the word [reason/thought] from it, or light precedes brilliance. For the Father and the Son, begotten from Him without beginning, having existence as one, also have one simple and undivided will, just as they have one essence and nature.

From the same discourse, on the text: "Otherwise, what prevents me, having made this proposition that the Father is greater by nature, and then having assumed another, that 'that which is greater is not overall greater, nor is the Father,' from concluding at last: 'Therefore, the greater is not overall greater, or, the Father is not overall Father?'"

^C Since the teacher wisely defined the Father as greater than the Son, as being the cause, since the Son is from the Father, but the Father is not from the Son, the Arians, having snatched the proposition that "the cause is by nature," maliciously gathered from it that "He is greater by nature." First, he vigorously refutes what they gathered by private reasoning, saying: "I do not know whether they deceive themselves or those to whom they direct their discourse." For not everything that is said about something can also be said about that which underlies ^D it; but it is clear about what and regarding whom these things are said. For he says that not everything said about the cause as cause will be said about that which is by nature. It is not according to reason to say that things said about a wise man or a king—as wise or as king—are also said of those who underlie these titles, such as men, and to illegally include in the definition of the essence of those who underlie them the things said about wisdom as wisdom, and about kingship as kingship—things which have absolutely nothing in common by the rationale of essence as constitutive differences and completions of it.

^A Then, more wisely, having joined a syllogism to them from their own proposition, he slays them with their own sword. It holds thus: "Otherwise, what prevents me also, having made this proposition that 'The Father is greater by nature,' ^B and then having taken the other that 'What is by nature is not altogether greater, nor is the Father,' from gathering from this that 'The greater is not altogether greater,' or 'The Father is not altogether Father'?" And so that it may be clearer and more comprehensive to us, let us represent what is said in a diagram, if you please, beginning from the attempt of the adversaries, and ending in the teaching of the Father.

Proposition of the Arians, or rather Eunomians: "If the Father is by nature the cause of the Son, and the Father is greater than the Son, it follows therefore that the Father is greater than the Son by nature."

Solution of our holy Father Gregory, reducing the adversaries to absurdity and refuting them: "If according to you the Father is greater than the Son by nature, but ^C that which is by nature is in no way greater than the Father, it follows that the greater is in no way greater, or that the Father is in no way Father."

Thus are those who deny the truth overturned, caught by their own stratagems, and lightly cast out from piety—those vain men. For from such words they constitute the conclusions of their propositions, and from the conclusions they define their propositions, with which those who think themselves wise wrap themselves up, through their own great ignorance.

"Let it be also of operation, if it seems so; not even thus will you prevail. For in exactly the same way we shall say that the Father has acted so that the Son might be consubstantial, even if the opinion of such an operation ^D is otherwise not without absurdity."

Since those who have their tongue sharpened like a razor against the truth said, asking as if in inquiry: "Is 'Father' a name of essence, or of operation?"—in order that if we said that "Father" is a name of essence, they might gather from this that the Son is of a different essence from the Father, since two distinct names, properly speaking, do not belong to the same essence (for if "Father" is a name of essence, "Son" could never be the name of the same essence); or if it is of operation, they might show that we confess the Son to be a product of the Father, as if it were an act—after the master had gone through the strict literal meaning and immediately said that "Father" is neither a name of essence, nor of operation, but of relation, and of how the Father is toward the Son, or the Son toward the Father, he engagingly inferred by saying: "Let it be also of operation, if this seems so," and he adds: "For in this same way we shall say that the Father has acted so that the Son might be consubstantial." How, then, does the consubstantial act? someone of those who are overly inquisitive and who cannot bear to be ignorant of anything useful might perhaps ask. This will be smoothed out in the following way. They say that there are two universal operations in beings,

^A one of which results in what is naturally produced from those things which are of the same kind and essence, being everywhere the same and constant to themselves. Concerning this, the master, as if complying with those captious people, so as to restrain them for a little while at least from blaspheming, says: "Be it, then, according to you," according to the hypothesis of the discussion, "be the name of the operation 'Father'." And he subjoins: "For in the same way we should say that the Father has acted this very thing," that is, in such a way that the Son was consubstantial with Him, as if the operation were creating something essentially subsisting and living, just as, indeed, the god-minded teachers of the truth have spoken of the Only-begotten Word of God and Son of the Father as the living Word, power, and wisdom subsisting by Himself. They establish that the other operation pertains to producing external things, by which someone, acting upon something external and of a foreign essence, constructs from pre-existing matter something else that is alien and different from his own essence. They say that this operation is combined with the arts according to knowledge. Concerning this, the divine doctor says: "Even if it is otherwise absurd," namely, according to the reasoning in which it is accepted, "the opinion of an operation of this kind," especially if it is taken regarding the Father and the Son—concerning whom a pious mind does not allow us to posit even the former operation, because the ineffable and incomprehensible substance of the Only-begotten surpasses even this, as He is from the Father, with the Father, and in the Father. ^B

From the second sermon concerning the Son, on the passage: "But God is said ^C not by reason of the Word, but of that part which falls into the perception of the eyes. For in what way could He who is God be called God?" Just as He is not Father by reason of humanity, but by reason of the Word. For He consisted of a double nature; whence it happens that one thing is predicated of both properly, and another improperly, contrary to how the matter stands with us. For God is our God properly, but He is not properly our Father.

"The other is to be posited properly concerning both," concerning the Father and concerning God, as both can be called properly of Christ on account of the unity of substance. For God is properly the Father of Christ, since He is the Son and the Word of God and one of the holy Trinity, even after the incarnation; and He is again properly the God of the same Christ, since he is truly human on account of the flesh, and was called one of the humans; for the things that belong to the parts are predicated properly of the whole which consists from them, because it properly receives whatever things naturally inhere in the parts, from which they also stand. "The other improperly, concerning both," is equally to be understood both concerning God and concerning the Father, because neither term can be called properly of Christ on account of the natural difference of the natures from which and in which He consists. ^D For those things which adhere to that which is a whole from composition, from one or the other of its parts, these will be predicated equally and properly. But "on the contrary," that is, conversely as it is with us. When [207b]

^A I observe the difference of the natures, and make a distinction of them by an act of contemplation, I cannot place that which is common to both properly, I mean the terms "Father" and "God." For God is not properly the Father of the Word, nor is God properly the Father of the flesh. "On the contrary," that is to say, otherwise, or inversely, both as to the "properly" and "not properly"—both in the case of the union and the one subsistence, and in the case of the difference of the natures and the distinction of them by thought—they are understood in such a way that the one subsistence, as the one Christ, admits God and Father to be spoken of properly, according to the cause previously given, while the difference of the natures according to essence, on the other hand, admits the "not properly," as is the case with us. For in our case, God is properly God, just as he is for the flesh of the Word, but not properly Father, just as he is not for the flesh of the Word. Therefore, the properties of the whole are to be ascribed to the parts, and the properties of the proper parts to the whole, and the understanding of what is proposed will be easy and clear. And that what is said may be clearer, whenever Christ is considered as a subsistence, the term "properly" must be placed upon both—I mean "God" and "Father"—but when, through the unconfused existence of those in which and from which the natures of Christ are considered, the "contrary" must be placed, which is "not properly," as it is in our case. And the teacher clearly indicates this, saying by way of addition: "And this is what leads the heretics into error, namely, the conjunction ^B of these names, the names being exchanged because of the union." And the sign of this is that when the natures are separated by [203 a] thoughts, the names are also divided together with them. That is to say, as long as you look upon Christ as one subsistence, the conjunction of the names by exchange is indivisible; but when you have separated in your mind the natures that complete the one subsistence of Christ, you have also divided the names along with the natures again. Since Christ is twofold by nature, both terms are predicated of him, "God" and "Father," properly indeed when the names are pronounced fittingly with the natures, but not properly when the possession of each of those from which and in which and what he is—because of the one subsistence—is exchanged and attributed to the other. Not knowing how to do this, or more properly speaking, not enduring to, the heretics of that time and of today do not shrink from blaspheming the only-begotten God the Word, some reducing him to a creature because of the human things, others confounding the dispensation because of the denial of the natures from which he consists. Another, ^C very wise in divine matters, having been asked by me about this passage, said: "The 'properly' and the 'not properly' regarding both are of the same relative predication, whether of 'Father' or of 'God', or even of any other name, inasmuch as they are placed upon one Christ, who consists of two opposites, 'properly' and 'not properly.' If God were said to be the Father of Christ according to the consideration of the two natures, he would be called 'properly' so in relation to the creature, and 'not properly' in relation to God the Word." And likewise also from the opposites, he is "properly" the Father of the Word, but of the…

^A creature, properly, as it is with us, and "not properly" is the Father. Having accepted this suggestion from the wise man as being well-stated, I saw fit to include it in the writing.

From the same discourse, on the text: "To receive Him, that is Christ, life or judgment, or the inheritance of the nations, or authority over all flesh, or glory, or disciples, or whatever else is mentioned," and the master follows this with: "This also relates to the humanity," and subsequently: "Although we also attribute these to God, no absurdity will follow from this. For you would not attribute them as if they were adventitious, but as those which from the beginning co-existed with Him, and by reason of nature, not of grace." ^B

Concerning this, when I had pondered with myself many times how and by what reason, as the master says, God is said to "receive" what belongs to His nature, and not having been able to satisfy myself, I finally decided that it was well to inquire of a wise elder, who very skillfully cleared up the argument concerning this, speaking as follows: "If we were to ask someone to show himself as an interpreter of the nature of things to his hearers, he would say: Let us grant to God omnipotence, wisdom, goodness, justice; likewise to the creature, servitude, obedience, circumscription, existence out of nothing, and what follows from these, inasmuch as the nature of each, in common concepts, claims for itself what is its own." ^C By these words, therefore, he did not attribute to God what did not adhere to Him, but what is peculiar to His nature. For this word "let us grant" signifies, as it were, defining a nature by those things which adhere to it, as opposed to those things which are not of that kind. In the same way, conceive of our teacher here also speaking piously: "Although we also attribute these to God," that is to say, as the nature receives what belongs to it, as determined by those who examine matters.

From the same discourse, on the text: "For as we say it ^D is impossible for God to be evil, or not to be."

I also inquired about this from the aforementioned wise elder, who replied that the words "not to be" do not relate to what preceded, lest we suspect that the word "to be" signifies that God is evil: "For we say that it is impossible for God to be evil, and not to be evil, but to be evil, with the word 'evil' posited in common." For two negatives result in one affirmation. Hence, the negative "impossible," when combined with "not to be evil," would conclude that He is evil. Which is not the case. God forbid! But each...

^A thing has its connection from its own proper principle, so that the phrase may be smoothed out thus: "For just as we say it is impossible for God to be evil," then one must pause, so that again another clause may begin by being added: "Or not to be," that is, to lack existence.

Ex eodem sermone, in illud: "You have the appellations of the Son; walk by them, all of them—those which are sublime, divinely; and those which are bodily, with sympathy; or rather, entirely divinely, so that you may become God, having ascended from below through Him who for our sake descended from above."

He who has enlightened his mind through high contemplation concerning the understanding ^B of each of the divine names, and has led it up to the principal and spiritual meaning of each and transformed it, and by labors undertaken for the sake of virtue has subjected the prudence of the flesh to the spirit, and becomes obedient even unto death—he truly "walks through the divine appellations," irreproachably both in spirit and in flesh, making the distinct journey that leads toward God, "sublime" indeed according to mystical contemplation through the sublime names, and "with sympathy" according to practical philosophy, as through bodily things he hastens toward the rest above, "or rather, entirely divinely," since his action is also contemplative and not in need of rational grace; but whose grace, he clearly signifies, began the perfect alienation of will from the flesh by the circumcision of its natural motions, in order that he himself might also become God by grace, establishing himself above material things in the flesh through action, and ^C above form through contemplation—from which the existence of things consists—and to say the whole thing, according to the habit of virtue and knowledge, having become altogether immaterial and without form, through the God-Word who for our sake truly became in matter and form, according to us, from us, who in His own nature is properly immaterial and without form. Or even again, the phrase: "Or rather, entirely divinely," he said on account of him who exercised the virtue and knowledge possible to humans, from love of God and neighbor, a state free from passion, whereby he might suffer for the debt of others and readily lay down his life, as one being altogether free from all ^D blemishes and stains.

Of the same, from the discourse on the Nativity, on the text: "The laws of nature are dissolved; the world above must be filled. Christ commands: let us not resist."

In truth, the laws of nature, having been dissolved, wrought the completion of the world above. Clearly, if they had not been dissolved, the world above would have remained incomplete and unfulfilled.

^A And what are these laws of nature that are dissolved? It is, as I believe, conception through sowing and birth through destruction—neither of which fully characterized the true incarnation of God and the perfect assumption of a human body. For the conception was truly without sowing, and the birth was utterly without destruction, pure and untouchable; and for this reason the Mother remained a Virgin even after the birth of the One born, remaining even more impassible through the childbirth—which is both a paradox and something exceeding every law and reason of nature—and God, who deigned to be born of her in the flesh, bound to her, as to a mother, the bonds of maidenhood through the very birth. It is a thing truly wondrous to behold and to hear: that an infant should be conceived and brought forth while the birth-gates of her who bore him remained unopened. ^B For it was truly necessary, it was necessary for the Creator of nature, in reforming nature through Himself, to first dissolve the laws of nature by which sin, through disobedience, had condemned men to possess, in common with irrational animals, the quality of succession from one another, and thus to renew the laws of the first and truly divine creation, so that what man had lost through negligence, as one weak, God, in His mercy, might restore as one powerful. If, therefore, the laws of nature imposed on account of sin were dissolved in Christ, and every servile uprising of the passions was utterly removed by the advent of the Word, it is absolutely necessary that the world above be completed, as the master says. And let us not object to this. ^C For if the old Adam, who was subject to sin and a simple and frail man, having dissolved in spirit the first laws of nature through disobedience, filled the lower world with those born of his seed and in the flesh into destruction, becoming the author of the likeness of his own transgression—and no one will gainsay it—how much more should the sinless new Adam, Christ, who is God, having dissolved the laws of irrationality introduced into nature on account of sin, as the Word, justly fill the world above with those born of Him in spirit into incorruption, having become the author of the likeness of His own obedience. And let no one refuse faith who has even slightly perceived the power of God and has not been ignorant of its magnitude. ^D Thus, then, the world above is filled with those born of Christ in the Spirit, and thus the law of this carnal and lower birth finds an appropriate end, and everything is rearranged in even order toward the world above.

Another observation on the same subject.

Since the discourse of the master seems to me to admit of another interpretation in addition to these, this too must be proposed to the best of my ability, with God Himself directing the discourse in the Gospels. The one and unique cause of all things...

my God, Jesus, implicitly teaching through parables about the sheep that wandered from the divine hundred, and the drachma that was lost from the divine decade, and the prodigal son who foolishly leaped away from his father and dissolved the harmony of the divine fraternal ^A dyad, called man a "sheep," I suppose, as being a subject of his providence, led, and ordered, and providing to his possessor the three things necessary—wool, lamb, and milk—as one who is both nourished and nourishes by the rationale and mode of natural contemplation, and who is both clothed and clothes by the mode of moral philosophy, and who is both enriched and enriches, according to the generation of the like, through the mystery of true intuition. He is called a "drachma," as being bright and royal, and by the rationale of the image, characteristic of the divine archetype, and as being capable, so far as possible, of all divine beauty. He is called a "son," as heir of the paternal goods and equal in honor with the Father by the gift of grace. This man, as a sheep that had wandered, the provident God sought out as a shepherd and found, and, laying him upon his own shoulders, brought him back into the fellowship of the fold. But as an image besmirched by passions and deprived of its original beauty, the Word (Sermo), as Wisdom, found it by lighting his own flesh as a lamp with the light of his own Divinity, and made this finding an occasion of great joy, by which he filled up the lack of the divine decade. And as a son dead to sin and lost to the ignorance regarding God, the good Father accepted him upon his return, and again bestowed upon him the marks of his former dignity without failure; and, what is the greatest and most mystical of all, he sacrifices the fatted calf. Whatever this calf was, and his wondrous sacrifice (I think it is the most supreme, most hidden, and most unknown Word, according to the divine and ineffable providence, the incomprehensible and unknown manner of it, and his divine communion with those who exist), and he makes the return of the son the summary of ineffable joy, which has magnificently fulfilled and completed the dyad of the sons—whatever this return is, as well as the decade of the drachmas that preceded it, and the hundred of the sheep mentioned before this. Concerning these, if it is agreeable, let us omit speaking now, regarding it more opportune to observe at another time, with careful study, if God grants, the mystical reason inherent in each number. If, therefore, as a sheep, the good shepherd carried man back to his fellows upon his shoulders, and as a drachma, having the royal impression through the image, the Lord and Savior, as the Wisdom and Power of God the Father, found man through his incarnation, and as a son returning, the good and all-merciful Father received him and counted him among the heavenly powers, having filled the lack of each of the numbers among those in the heavens through the one who was saved, it is manifest that Christ ^D God completed the higher world, having divinely wrought the salvation of all within Himself.

Another contemplation on the same.

^A But let us, if it please you, contemplate this question from another angle. Those who have accurately examined the nature of all things define the law of each nature as the unwavering and immutable constancy of the reason according to which it exists and has originated; and, as it seems to me, no one who participates in reason, having heard this, would fail to agree that the definition of the law of nature is well expressed in this way. If this is true, it is evident that by the necessity of the law of nature, just as it keeps the account of nature inviolable, so too does it preserve its place, according to its position, entirely unchanged. However, He who wisely defined the substance of each type of being by law, and reason, and nature—He who exists above nature, and law, and intellect, and reason, and place, and motion—does not act towards those things which are subject to nature according to any of the laws of nature. Rather, acting in a way congruent with Himself in those things that are subject to nature, He addresses, by way of the supernatural, those things which are according to nature, acting and being acted upon; and in both respects—both in His own being acted upon and in the things that are done—He miraculously preserves for Himself, in accordance with nature, a purity that is unchangeable. ^B Thus, having truly moved downward to us in His appearance among us, He became perfect man, yet He was not moved from Himself at all, nor did He incur any danger of local circumscription; and He fully deified us, taking nothing at all of our nature away through alteration, but giving Himself entirely and without fail, and having taken up the whole man, complete through an ineffable and inviolable union, He diminished nothing of either perfection. He is truly the same entire God and the same entire man, bearing witness to Himself in the perfection of both of these in which He truly is, that He is in both respects ^C unchangeable and immutable. Thus God dissolves the laws of nature, while, in a supernatural manner, He uses nature within the bounds of natural things.

Another contemplation on the text: "The higher world must be completed."

If, therefore, Christ, as man, is the first-fruits of our nature and, as it were, the leaven of the whole lump before God and the Father, and if He Who is before God and the Father according to the conception of humanity is the very One who never departed from His constancy in the Father, as the Word, let us not doubt that, according to His petition to the Father, ^D we shall be where He Himself, the first-fruits of our race, is. For just as He descended for our sake, remaining unchanged, and became man in our likeness, apart from sin alone, having supernaturally dissolved the laws of nature, so too we also, in consequence, shall ascend on high through Him and shall become gods according to Him by the mystery of grace, without altering our nature in any way. And thus, once again, according to the wise teacher, the higher world is filled, as the members of the body are gathered according to their worth and merit to the Head, with each one, clearly, a member

^A that, through the architecture of the Spirit, fittingly receives the place appropriate to it by reason of its proximity to virtue, and fills the body of Him who is full and perfect in all things, and who fills all things and is filled from all. Therefore, whether it be, as has been said, according to the spiritual regeneration of those who are born according to Christ, or according to the mystical repletion in heaven that has come to pass in and through Christ—I mean the divine hundred of rational sheep, and the mystical decade of intellectual drachmas, and the honorable dyad of the sons—or whether it be according to the gathering of the members of the body to their own Head and to the first-fruit of the lump, the world above will surely be filled according to the teacher, having been filled already in Christ, but destined to be filled again later in those who are according to Christ, when they shall be conjoined with Him, and having already experienced the same sufferings through the likeness of His death, they shall also become participants in His resurrection.

On the same passage, concerning: "A Child is born to us and a Son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder; for he is exalted by the cross."

Entirely adding to the first argument through the argument, the great prophet Isaiah ^C makes his argument concerning the Word made flesh, mystically saying, "Whose government is upon his shoulder," summarizing, as is his custom, what it is right to think this government is, this great teacher made clear [it], saying: "For he is exalted by the cross." But since the cross admits of many contemplations in the thoughts [we have] regarding it, it is worth the effort to inquire in what sense the teacher called the cross "government" in the present instance. For the cross is contemplated according to its shape, according to its composition, according to the characteristic property of its parts, according to its action ^D and according to many other conceptions, which are visible to those who love to contemplate divine things. According to shape, for instance, when the cross, being observed as embracing the whole—both that which is above and that which is below on either side—with its own boundaries, signifies power; according to composition, when it indicates the essence and providence and judgment, that is, their manifestations—I mean wisdom and knowledge and the virtue of the power governing the whole; the essence, indeed, and the wisdom as creative, through the upright line; providence and knowledge as preservative, through the crossbar; and judgment and virtue as the destroyer of wickedness, and that which [binds] the things made and created to their own principle and cause, through the whole. And according to the characteristic property of the parts, when through...

^A an upright line God—who remains always the same to himself and never departs from his own solidity, on account of his stable and immovable placement—is signified by the cross, while through the transverse [bar] it reveals the whole of creation as being entirely dependent upon God, having no other principles of existence or foundation outside of God; and according to action, finally, when it denotes the inactivity and mortification of those who are affixed to the cross; in this mode of contemplation, as it seems to me, the teacher has now interpreted the prophetic word.

Just as, therefore, of every principality—for it is fitting to seek from our own affairs examples by which to demonstrate the truth of things above us—there are certain insignia by which those who receive them are known to everyone, such that one now holds magistracy from the king, as there are for governors what we call codicils, another [holds] that which is called, as we say, a ducatus, for which the sword is the ensign, and to others there are other insignia which they receive from the king and bear with their own hands, but when they go out from home, they hand them to household servants to carry; in this manner also our Lord Jesus Christ, with respect to his humanity, accepted the symbols of his own kingdom, his cross, and going forth carried it on his shoulders, ^B and he first carried it himself, then gave it to another, signifying by these things that he to whom authority is entrusted ought first to go before those who are led by that authority and to protect those who are assigned to him (for thus they willingly obey his commands and exhortations), and afterward to order those who are entrusted to him to do the same.

But if the ensign of the empire of our Lord Jesus Christ is the cross, which he carried on his shoulders, it is necessary to know what he desired to signify by these things, having so mystically arranged and endured them. Those who are skilled in symbols say that the shoulder is the proof of action, but the cross [is the proof] of impassibility, as it produces mortification. Through these enigmas, therefore, our Lord and God, having fulfilled both of those things of which they are the enigmas (I mean action and perfect impassibility), so that action might not be destroyed by vainglory, demonstrated through those things which he himself accomplished to his subjects, almost crying out with a clear voice: "This is the symbol of my empire: whoever therefore of you desires this empire, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me," that is ^C the action that slays the passions, probity, and a mind honest and free from all envy; by which words he signifies that he desires all men similarly to be partakers of this empire with him.

For when the master says, "He is raised up with the cross," I think that by these things he provides us with an intimation of this kind: that when the rational nature of men is exalted through action and the impassibility conjoined to it, ^D the very... [of the upright line]... [remaining always the same and of...].

order, and moving through action which destroys impassibility into a gnostic contemplation of nature, and from thence into a theological mystagogy. This is what the holy Areopagite, the great Dionysius, appears to me to signify in the place where he says: "But since the holy principle of sacred discipline is God, by which holy minds become cognizant of themselves, whoever turns back to the light inherent in nature will first see what he himself is; and he will receive as a first holy gift the accession from his own light. But he who has contemplated his own proper nature well with eyes undisturbed by any affection, having left behind the dark recesses of ignorance, and being not yet a participant in the most perfect illumination and communion of God, will not of his own ^B will be affected by a desire for this, but gradually, through his own first principles, will be brought up to those that are even more prior, and, being perfected, will be raised into the highest order and holy communion of the divine command." Thus, therefore, according to this great and God-minded teacher, the Highest—who remains so—is exalted with the cross through us, as we are exalted in spirit after His likeness, being led by action and the impassibility conjoined to it into knowledge, and through that, into another mind, are raised to the mystical contemplation of divine things and to initiation—and I will dare to add, even to communion.

From the same discourse, on the words: "The Word becomes dense."

To "become dense" is said by the God-bearing teacher of the Word, as I think, in this sense: either because the Word, being simple and incorporeal, and nourishing all the divine powers in heaven in order, spiritually, deigned also, through His incarnation among us and for us, and in our likeness without sin, to become dense, and fitly to set forth to us, by words and examples, the teaching concerning things ineffable and surpassing the power of any word (for it is said that He spoke all things through parables, and explained nothing without a parable; for it was His custom to use this method with His disciples when the hearers could not follow the things spoken in their original sense, so as to lead them to an understanding and perception of what was said); or because, ^D hiding Himself for our sake in the principles of the things that exist, He is signified through each of those things that are seen, as if through certain writings, being wholly present in all things at once in the fullest measure, and entire in every single thing, whole and undiminished, the same and not different in what is diverse, and remaining always the same, in composite things the simple and uncompounded, and in those that are subjected to a beginning the beginningless, and the invisible in things that are seen, and the untouched in things that are tangible; or because, for our sake, who are "dense" in mind, He deigned for us both to be incarnate and in writing...

for our sake, to be expressed in letters, syllables, and words, so that through all these things, as we follow Him, He might shortly after gather us to Himself, united in the Spirit, and lead us back to a simple, pure, and affect-free contemplation of Him; for He withdrew Himself in the measure that He, for our sake, condescended out of kindness.

From the same sermon, on the passage: "Not from those things which are in Him, but from those which are around Him, one species collected from another, into a certain image of truth."

^BConcerning things essential—that is, from the essence itself—it is in no way known that God exists. For the notion of what He is, is utterly unapproachable and inaccessible to every creature, as much to those that are visible as to those that are invisible; but God gives Himself to be known by those who see, only by those things which are around the essence, if these are observed well and piously. Yet whatever things are around the essence signify not what He is, but what He is not—as, for instance, that He is not created, that He is without beginning, that He is without end, that He is incorporeal, and whatever other things of this sort pertain to the essence—and they prove that He is not something, but they do not prove that He is something; nor do they present the "what it is" of His essence. But the reasons of providence and judgment, by which the universe is wisely governed, and associated with which the harmonious contemplation of nature is also called a contemplation of God, aptly demonstrate only the existence of their Creator.

Therefore, while negations are opposed to affirmations, they mutually reconcile themselves around God and receive one another in a friendly manner: for as the negations signify that the Divine is not "something," but rather express the "not being" something in relation to the fact that He *is* something, they are reconciled with the affirmations; and conversely, the affirmations, by revealing only that He *is*, without disclosing what indeed that is, are reconciled with the negations in relation to the fact that He is not "something." While they show their contrariety by way of opposition to one another, around God they show, by the mutual conversion of these extremes into one another as the subject matter requires, their kinship.

From the same sermon, on the passage: "But since it did not suffice for goodness to be moved only by its own contemplation, but it was necessary for the good to be poured out and propagated, so that there might be more things to be benefited."

^DWhen I asked the great and wise elder whom I have often mentioned, whom I consulted concerning this passage, he replied that by these words the great and God-bearing Gregory was signifying that God is one in Himself, as one who is truly and properly "One," having within Himself absolutely nothing diverse by nature that can be conceived along with Him, but having in Himself alone an imperceptible, beginningless, endless, and incomprehensible stability, from which, by an infinite outpouring of goodness, He brought beings forth from non-being and...

^A to put forth [from non-existence] and cause to subsist that which exists, and willed to communicate Himself in a manner befitting both the whole and each individual, granting to each the power to be and to endure, according to what the holy and godlike [Dionysius] (215 ɑ) the Areopagite says, identifying the unity in God as that which is to be praised, in that He is exalted above all things, having brought forth into being both the entire order of intelligible things and the beauty of those that are seen, that it might dwell in each creature undiminished according to a certain ineffable logic of wisdom, and yet in no way or manner be comprehended by any of them. To some He gives according to an abundant flow of goodness, to others moderately, and to others just enough so that they might be able to image Him. And this, perhaps, to my folly, is what is called "the good" pouring itself out and progressing—that the one God, according to the capacity of the recipient, is multiplied in the communication of good things.

From the same sermon, on the passage: "He communicates a second communion, far more marvelous than the first." (26)

It was not, I think, so marvelous, however great it may be, that God, in the first ^B creation, led human nature—being pure, insofar as it was honored by the hand of God—into communion with Himself by the breath of the Spirit, granting an equal share in the beauty of the divine image; rather, it is marvelous that He deigned to associate with this nature even when it had been stained and had fled from God through the pollutions of the passions it had gathered, and did not disdain communion with the inferior, and indeed arrived at the very state of things that is everywhere disparate and alien to Him, by a wondrous union magnifying the miracle. For previously, human nature had taken on unity with God in no way or reason of essence or hypostasis—those categories in which all that exists is generally viewed—but now it has received unity with Him according to hypostasis through an ineffable union, ^C while still keeping its own proper logic, according to its essence, unchangeably and distinctly from the divine essence, with which the divine essence, once united, possesses both unity and diversity. Thus, according to the logic of existence, by which it was made and exists, it keeps what is peculiar to itself undiminished in any part, nor does it, by reason of its quality, having attained to divine existence, experience or admit in any way the inclination of motion toward anything else. In this way, therefore, the Word accomplished a communion with human nature far more marvelous than the first, by substantially uniting that very nature to Himself according to hypostasis ^D.

From the same, on the passage: "Now, however, receive the conception and leap for joy, if not as John in the womb, then as David for the resting of the ark." (27)

John the great was not only of repentance and of...

^Actical philosophy’s impassibility and gnostic contemplation is an image; of the former as herald and baptist, of the latter as hermit and one utterly separated from the world, and further as Levite and priest and precursor of the divine Word; but he is also a symbol of the habitual constancy and stability found in these, inasmuch as he preserved the intensity of his soul unyielding in them from the womb even unto death. David, moreover, is himself an image of confession, action, and contemplation, as he was first a shepherd of the Judaic tribe and afterwards king, and a destroyer of the Allophyli, but not also a symbol of the habitual stability of these. For after his recognition he fell away, suffering something human, and did not preserve the habit of virtue and knowledge immutable. Wherefore, perhaps, it is not narrated that he leaped for joy in the womb of the Word, as the great John did, but [only] after the complete slaughter of the Allophyli and the restoration of the ark—that is, after the subdual of the passions and the return of knowledge. Therefore, John is a type of all who are born in the Spirit through repentance into virtue and knowledge, and who through progress preserve the habit in them immutable to the end; but David is a type of all those who transgress after recognition, and who again through repentance bring back to the soul the exultation of divine joy concerning virtue and knowledge.

The great teacher, therefore, being brief, and wishing to restrict in the Spirit the force of his discourse which was prone to breadth, compared the hearers of the divine word with John and David, those two great men, by means of the habit of each, so that, as it seems, whoever lives piously might in every way correspond to one or the other of these, according to the manner clearly demonstrated for each, crying out as if explicitly: ^B "Whosoever among you have received the divine word of virtue and knowledge generated within you through repentance, whether you have firmly preserved—after the manner of the great John—the habitual divine exultation of the soul concerning It, through progress from beginning to end, being in no way subjected to any appearance of wickedness or ignorance, or—after the manner of the blessed David—even if something grave has happened to you according to the divine course, you labor diligently through repentance to bring back to yourselves the virtue and knowledge with the nerves of constancy and the exercises of divine discourses, and do not—through sloth or negligence—abandon and surrender this divine ark of virtue and knowledge within you, and fall victim to the evil of the priest Eli, and, struck on the shoulder of action and falling backward, be slain near the gates of the temple in Shiloh."

This, as it seems to me, this same blessed Father demonstrates more clearly in his discourse on the New Sunday, where he says: « We are commanded to sing a new song to the Lord, whether we are those who have been reduced to Babylon and the wicked ^C confusion through sin, or having been saved afterwards to Jerusalem, and there...

^A indeed being unable to sing the divine song as if in a strange land, here we nevertheless establish a new song and way of life, or whether we are those who have remained in the good and are progressing, some having already attained their goal, others still attaining it through the aid of the renewing Spirit. These things, according to my foolishness, I imagine the master to have had in mind when he said: “But now receive the conception and leap for joy, if not like John from the womb, yet like David at the replacement of the Ark, and having comprehended the contemplation of the aforementioned words in a manner worthy of the dignity and genus of contemplation.” For those who are precise cultivators of such ^B mysteries and lovers and beholders of the spiritual rationales contained within them say that the general rationale ofScriptural contemplation, although it is one, is observed to be expanded in ten ways: by place, time, genus, person, and dignity—that is, by practice, [by] natural or theological philosophy, [by] present and future—or, that is to say, by type and truth. And, furthermore, [they say] that this [rationale], while being one, is contracted by five ways, then by three, and again by two, and in the end, it gathers the two into one non-numerical rationale. For instance, the five—[those according to] time, place, genus, person, and dignity—they gather into three—those of practice, nature, and theology—and these three, in turn, into two—which signify the present and the future—and these finally into the consummative and simple, as they say, and all-encompassing ineffable rationale, from which, by progression, the general decad ^C of the modes under the contemplation of Scripture was constituted, and into which, as a principle, the same decad is gathered back again into union by circumscription.

And the rationale of Scripture is viewed according to time whenever it signifies “Sometime,” “Was,” “Is,” “Shall be,” “Before this,” “Present,” “After this,” “Under this,” “From the beginning,” “Past,” “Future,” and years and seasons and months and weeks and days and nights and the parts of these, and simply whatever is indicative of time. According to place, it signifies when it denotes heaven and earth and air and sea, the inhabited world, borders, regions, islands, cities, temples, villages, fields, mountains, ravines, roads, rivers, deserts, wine-presses, threshing-floors, vineyards, and simply whatever is able to characterize a place. According to genus, in a general sense, it signifies when it speaks of angels or whatever belongs to the ^D order of intellectual essences in the heavens, and furthermore the sun and moon, stars, fire, and whatever exists in the air, on earth, or in the sea, whether living creatures, or zoophytes, or plants, and whatever is mined from the earth and falls under the arts of men, and whatever other things of this kind [there are]; but in a specific sense, in turn, when it names men, nations, peoples, tongues, tribes, clans, and whatever things of this kind, with or without number. According to person, [it is viewed] when it calls this angel or that archangel, or Seraphim, or whatever of the intellectual essences dwelling in the heavens, by name, or Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob, or anyone else of those recorded in the Scripture as being praised or blamed, by name...

or according to dignity, such as a kingdom, or a king, or a shepherd, or a flock, or a priest, or a priesthood, or a farmer, or a general, or an architect, and simply if anything else of those by which the human race is divided into pursuits and professions. ^A For the Word shows that all these things, whatever are comprised by those five modes, are composed in essence and power and action, in their primary distinctions, and whether they move or are moved, act or are acted upon, behold or are beheld, speak or are spoken of, teach or are taught, turn toward or turn away; and simply, to speak briefly, while they act or suffer, they introduce to us in various ways a practical, natural, and theological philosophy concerning their mutual interconnection; since each of these things that have been mentioned is accepted with praise or blame through the multifarious thoughts of contemplation concerning it, and shows its own reasons—those that are to be done or not to be done, natural or unnatural, intelligible or unintelligible. ^B For the mode of each reason is twofold, as I said, according to the ability of him who prudently institutes an examination of the contemplation in them, so that from the setting forth of the reasons that are to be done, natural, and intelligible, and from the removal of the phantasies of those that are not to be done, unnatural, and unintelligible, the practical, natural, and theological philosophy may be produced for the pious—or, to say the same thing, the love of God. And these in turn are divided into the present and the future, as they have shadow and truth, and type and archetype. But if a man in this age possesses an excellent and sublime ^C ability to attain the highest measure of virtue and knowledge and wisdom, and to excel in the science of divine things, he has it as a type and image of the archetypes. For every truth that is now thought to be ours is truly a type, and a shadow of the greater Word, and an image. The Word that is in all things, both in the present and unto the future, the creator of all, since it is present both in the type and in the truth, is understood to exist as much as it is seen, and it surpasses both the present and the future, and both type and truth, in that it has nothing opposed to it with which it might be viewed. But what is opposed to truth is falsehood. ^D Therefore, the Word to which all things are gathered surpasses truth; and again, as being man and God, it is truly above all humanity and divinity.

The first five modes are therefore gathered according to their multifarious contemplation into practical, natural, and theological philosophy; these in turn are gathered into the present and the future—that is, into type and truth; and the present and the future into the primordial, that is, the Word who was in the beginning, who makes Himself suffered and seen by those who have become worthy of Him, and through the aforementioned things have made with great zeal the journey to Him; and who have made the decad produced by them, through Him, a monad, having shaken off from themselves every movement subject to passion and every truly human and divine [movement]. [218 α] Above all truth, therefore, is the Word to which all things are gathered, and again, as being man and God, and being above all truth, both humanity and divinity.

^A And it is the property of the divine natural simplicity, in grace, to form them according to a complete habit. One must know this also: that the principle of providence has been sown into natural philosophy, and the principle of judgment into active philosophy, according to the modes suitable to them, in which they are manifested through the contemplation of things that exist and are generated. Having understood these things, as has been said, I consider this God-minded teacher to have appropriately called the saints who were named [in the text] according to the mode of their lineage and dignity, and the contemplation concerning them, while for the great John, [he named him] also from his place. Therefore, saint John is an image of action as a herald of repentance; of impassibility as a hermit; of gnostic contemplation as a Levite and priest; and, as one who leaped from the womb, he is a symbol of the steadfastness and habit of virtue and knowledge. The holy David, on the other hand, as a Jew ^B and shepherd, figures active philosophy through confession, and as king of Israel, introduces contemplative mystagogy. The lineage, therefore, of saint John is the race and tribe from which he originated; his dignity is the proclamation and priesthood; and his place is the desert in which he lived. In the same way for holy David: his lineage is the race and tribe, and his business—that is, his dignity—is the pastoral office and the kingdom. In which, if each is viewed proportionally to himself according to the appropriate reasoning of the modes indicated concerning them, the mystery denoted through them is shown «without stumbling».

From the same discourse, on the text: "If he flees into Egypt, willingly join him as a companion in flight; it is noble to flee with Christ who is suffering persecution. If he tarries in Egypt, call him out of Egypt, for he is rightly worshipped and honored there."

We ought, as I think, along with knowing that the Lord fled ^C into Egypt, to know as a logical consequence from whom he was fleeing. The Lord, therefore, flees not only simply into Egypt, but as one sought by Herod, who was at that time reigning over the land of Judea. And Herod is interpreted, as they say, as "passion," and "leathern," and "nature." Egypt itself, too, is taken in many ways according to the conceptions of the contemplative modes concerning it: sometimes as the present world, sometimes as the flesh, sometimes as sin, sometimes as ignorance, and sometimes as vexation—according to which interpretation it is most appropriate now to accept the Lord’s flight into Egypt. It is, therefore, good to flee into Egypt with Christ—that is, ^D with the divine discernng Word within us, who is for the time being suffering persecution on account of his infancy, suffering persecution for the sake of us who are infants along with him, at the hands of the one who still rules and reigns over us through the impassioned movements of the flesh and the earthly mindset, into the vexation through

^A the active life, until such time as death—that is, the passionlessness—is revealed to us for those who seek the soul of the most divine Word who is still an infant within us. I mean those who wish to put to death our life which has been perfected in God according to the Word, and who rave in their desire to erase our Christ-like constitution, or habit; he who, by reason of our eagerness of will which is unswerving, descends upon our Egypt—I mean the flesh—like a light cloud, and shakes and casts down from their seat and utterly repels from the soul its movements and affections, which are like certain man-made idols, and, after the casting away of these images, duly transfers our worship to himself. In this way, then, we rightly flee with Christ who is being persecuted, receiving as a noble reward for the vexation of flight voluntarily undertaken with him, ^B the state of passionlessness. Again, we call Christ back from Egypt, not allowing our divine word of discernment to be mindlessly applied, after the withdrawal and total mortification of the passions, to the machinations of those who do not exist, nor allowing the Word to be known only as flesh within ourselves or in others who converse with us. Rather, let us beautifully and religiously ascend from these things through contemplation — having been pre-trained through the virtues in the patterns of practical philosophy according to the vexation—unto the knowledge of those things whose patterns and foreshadowings they are, just as one ascends beautifully from some Egypt to Judea, teaching also those with us to ascend; and let us pass over from the knowledge of the Word as flesh ^C to the glory which is the knowledge of him as the Only-Begotten from the Father. Thus does one beautifully and piously flee with Christ who is being persecuted, and thus does he again call him back, passing from the practical life to contemplation and knowledge, doing all things with the Word, according to the Word, for the sake of the Word.

Do not let it seem paradoxical to you that Egypt is here taken for the vexation according to virtue, but consider accurately the things recorded in the Old Testament: how it not only vexed Israel with the making of bricks, but also tortured the Egyptians themselves unto destruction through the coming of Moses. For it is interpreted, as I have said, that Egypt signifies both vexation ^D and darkness. Now, every interpretation, according to the standard of what is probable, admits of both a praiseworthy and a blameworthy sense through contemplation of that which falls under it. If, then, when the flesh is in good health and fattened by the passions, the soul is tortured and darkened as the state of the virtues and the illumination of knowledge withdraw, then in the same way, as must logically follow, when the soul is preserved and illuminated by the divine beauty of the virtues and the illumination of knowledge, the outer man perishes, as the flesh, because of the presence of the Word, casts off its natural well-being—in which the dragon that has power over the navel, that invisible Pharaoh who is, as it were, some dissipator of beautiful things, was lurking, or rather reigning, and creeping about, striking the soul with the bites of sin; who, through the partial]

^A insolence of the flesh and the active misuse of it, is extinguished, and departs utterly deadened, so that he does not, as is fitting, leave even a trace of his former tyranny. Consequently, those who have obtained freedom, even before the general resurrection—because of that voluntary resurrection of the power of choice which has already come to them—can cry out through Christ: "O death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?" They refer to the pleasure of the flesh and the deception of the soul conjoined with it, arising from ignorance, by which, once, before Christ, the most polluted devil, ruling over human nature, was fearlessly piercing the nature of men with the sting of pleasure, and was contentiously dragging it toward destruction with the sword of deception.

From the same, from the sermon On the Lights, on the scriptural passage: "If it were at all necessary for them to be entangled in impiety and to fall away from the glory of God, having been brought down to idols and works of art and the fabrications of hands, men of understanding could pray for nothing else against them than that they might revere such things and honor them in such a way." ^B

When these things had been read, some of the listeners, you say, reproached the teacher, claiming that it is not right for those who are men of understanding and desire to live according to the Gospel to pray that anyone should revere such things and honor them in such a way. To these, I myself say nothing; but that which I was taught about this matter by a certain elder who was wise in divine things and highly valued the teaching of the Fathers, I will say.

Our holy and blessed Father and teacher Gregory, O you [he is speaking as if the Greeks were actually present while he addressed them], seeing the Greeks primarily ^C led astray so irrationally, and led entirely away from the notion of Him who is truly God, recounts these things in a spirit of compassion, so that from the irrationality and baseness—or, to speak more correctly, the loathsomeness—of their objects of worship, and through the abundance of the argumentative discourses by which their worship is refuted, the ascent toward the right way might become easy for them. Furthermore, that none of them might be dragged along by an evil opinion, because the deception is easily manifest and visible to all, concealing no hidden evil from any honest person. ^D

From the same sermon, on the passage: "But where there is purging, there is illumination, and illumination is the fulfillment of desire for those who yearn for the greatest things, or rather, the Greatest, or rather, that which surpasses all greatness."

Those who are skilled in divine mysteries affirm that where there is a purging of the soul through the virtues, there also, after the pious consideration of the things that exist, an illumination of knowledge appears, which [leads] the mind...

soul upward and fastens its desire to the ultimate object of desire, which is God, who exists and is known properly in the greatest things, in the greatest [Being], and above the great. In the greatest things, [He exists] as in three coessential and equipotent hypostases, unconfused by the precise and immutable property concerning each, namely, unbegottenness, begetting, and procession. In the greatest [Being], [He exists] on account of the unity, identity, and singularity of the Godhead according to essence. And above the great, because the Divine is not circumscribed by any quantity, magnitude, or size, ^B nor is it divided by any limits. For every magnitude is finite, but the Divine alone is infinite, as the great David says: Great is the Lord and greatly to be praised, and of His greatness there is no finish; being as it is limited by no circumscription, and therefore also infinite, having no prior notion of time or nature, according to which the technical method of rational arguments has been devised for those who study such things, [a method] by which, and with which, we see them especially reproved in the investigation of truth, since whatever could not be conquered by their own reasonings, they did not believe to be true at all. The master proves this also in other places, using the same words. Just as in the sermon delivered on the Advent from Egypt, he interprets theologically concerning the unbegotten and divine essence, and concerning the created nature which has received a beginning of existence, in this way: "It is called God, he says, and stands in three greatest things: as Cause, as Maker, and as Perfecter, I mean the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." ^C And again, in the sermon on Baptism, disputing about one and the same holy God in three holy substances, he says: "Everywhere equal, everywhere the same, just as the beauty and magnitude of the heaven, an infinite conjunction of three infinites." The master therefore stands as his own interpreter to those who do not read his god-spoken words cursorily.

From the same sermon, on the text: "Natures are renewed, and God becomes man."

Those who [have received] the greater part of the divine mysteries from the followers and ministers of the Word, and who were directly initiated into the knowledge of things from Him, and who received those things handed down by succession from their predecessors, the saints state that the substance of all things that have been made is divided by five distinctions; of which they say the first is that which divides the created nature as a whole from the unbegotten nature, and [that which] has received its existence through generation. For they say that God, ^D by His goodness...

created a clear order and decoration of all things, and they call "division" that ignorance which causes the created reality ^A to distinguish itself from Him, and [they say] that it is impossible for it to be manifest to Him, or [to know] what it is. For that which naturally separates these things from one another, and never admits of a union into one essence, as if it were unable to receive one and the same Word—this they left unsaid.

The second [division] is that by which the entire nature that has received its existence from God through creation is divided into intelligible and sensible things. The third is that by which the sensible nature is divided into heaven and earth. The fourth is that by which the earth is divided into paradise and the inhabited world. And the fifth is that by which man—introduced ^B by generation among the things that exist as if he were a workshop of all things, and as one strongly binding together in himself all the things that have been created—is divided into male and female, naturally possessing within himself, through the relative property of his own parts toward all the extremes, the power of union by which the mode of the generation of things that are divided, being fulfilled, was destined to make manifest through himself the great mystery of the divine counsel: that which harmoniously determines the union of the extremes in the things that exist, proceeding in order from the things near to the things far, and from the lesser to the greater, ^C upward until it terminates in God.

For this reason, man is introduced as the last among created things, as a natural bond mediating the universal extremes through his own parts, and drawing into one within himself things that are naturally separated from one another by a great interval, so that, starting first from his own division, and then proceeding in series and order through the intermediate stages, he might attain the end of the high ascent made through all things toward God, the cause who gathers all things into union. In Him there is no division, since [man], having shaken off from his nature the property of female and male—which was by no means suspended from the primal and principal ^D intention of God regarding the generation of man—due to the state of absolute impassibility regarding divine virtue, is shown and becomes, according to the divine intention, man alone, not divided by the terminology of male and female, nor divided into the parts that now exist around him, because of the perfect knowledge of his own Word, as I have said. Then, having united paradise and the inhabited world through his own holy conduct, he would make them one earth, not divided by the difference of its parts, but rather gathered together, so as to suffer no separation regarding any of its parts; then, having united heaven and earth through his identity with the angels in life in every way according to virtue, as is possible for humans, he would make them one indivisible [whole].

in no way divided by local spaces, having become light in spirit and not held down by any bodily weight toward the earth, nor hindered from the ascent to the heavens by his mind, which, through its perfect invisibility toward these things, genuinely hastens toward God and wisely pursues the stretching forth toward Him, following in order as on a common path, naturally [moving] from what is before it to what is after it. Then, having united the intelligible and the sensible together with these things, through identity of knowledge with the angels, he would make the whole creation one creation, not divided for him by knowledge or ignorance, since the gnostic science of the principles (logoi) in existing things would be continuously and equally present to him as it is to the angels, ^B by which the boundless outpouring of true wisdom, having fallen upon him in accordance with what is right, henceforth purely provides to the worthy an unknown and ineffable conception concerning God; and finally, over all these things, having also united the created nature with the uncreated through love (O the miracle of God's philanthropy toward us!), he would show them to be one and the same according to the habit of grace, having wholly entered into God who is wholly, and having become all that God is, save for identity in essence, and having received the whole of God into himself, and having obtained God alone as the prize of his ascent to God, as the end of the motion of moving things, and the firm and immovable station of those being moved toward Him, and the end of every limit and ordinance and law, of word and mind and nature, being an unlimited and infinite goal.

Since, therefore, man by nature, as he was fashioned, was not moved concerning the immovable as his own beginning (I mean God), but against nature, willingly and senselessly, was moved concerning the things beneath him, over which he had been commanded by God to rule, abusing the natural power given to him at birth for the union of the separated, [turning it] rather toward the separation of the united, and in this affair almost miserably relapsed into non-being, ^C for this reason the natures are renewed, and in an incredible way and above nature, that which is by nature moved is moved immovably—if I may so speak—and God becomes man in order to save the lost human, and through himself joining the natural ruptures in the universality of nature, and the general principles (logoi) of the particulars, by which the union of the separated was to be established, manifesting the great will of God and the Father, he should fulfill it, ^D gathering together all things into himself, both those in heaven and those on earth, in whom also they were created. Certainly, therefore, the universal unification, by which all things are gathered into himself, [brought about] from our separation...

sake, and like us, possessing all that is ours without exception, sin excepted, and having no need at all in this regard for the natural consistency of marriage. And he showed, I think, that there was perhaps another way ^B known to God beforehand for the multiplication of human beings, if the first man had kept the commandment and had not degraded himself to the level of brute animals by the misuse of his own faculties, and had cast off the difference and division of nature according to male and female, for which—as I said—a man would not have had any need to be, and those things which it is perhaps possible to be without, there is no necessity should remain forever. For in Christ Jesus, says the divine Apostle, there is neither male nor female. Then, having sanctified our world through his own manner of life befitting a human being, after his death he enters the paradise ^C without hindrance, as he truthfully promised to the thief, saying, "Today you shall be with me in paradise." From that point on, then, insofar as our world no longer had any difference in relation to paradise, he appeared again on this earth and lived with his disciples after his resurrection from the dead, showing that the earth is one and remains indivisible in relation to itself, maintaining the reason according to which it is free from the division of difference. Then, through his ascension into heaven, he clearly united heaven and earth, and with that ^D earthly body of ours, which is of the same kind and same nature as ours, he entered into heaven, and showed the whole sensible nature to be one and the same with its more universal principle, blunting the property of the division that was cutting it into itself. After these things, he passed through all the divine and intelligible orders of heaven with soul and body—that is, with our complete nature—and united them, and showed the concurrence of the whole created order, according to his own most primordial and universal principle, to be absolutely indivisible and free from sedition in himself. And finally, in addition to all these things, according to the conception of humanity, he approaches God himself, appearing for our sake, as it is written, before the face of God and the Father as man, he who, being the Word, can in no way ever be separated from the Father, having fulfilled as man, in work and in truth, according to an unbroken obedience, all that he himself as God had predestined to come to pass, and having accomplished the whole will of God and the Father for the sake of us who had rendered vain, by our misuse, the power naturally granted to us from the beginning for this purpose, and having first united us to ourselves in himself through the removal of the difference according to male and female, and instead of men and women, in whom the mode of division is especially observed, [he] has properly and truly represented only human beings.

^A Having shown them, according to him, wholly configured and bearing his own entire and completely unadulterated image, to which in no way does any mark of corruption attach; and having, along with us and for our sake, gathered up the whole of creation through the middle parts, as if they were his own extremities, and having indissolubly bound them to himself and to one another—paradise and the world, heaven and earth, sensible and intelligible things, just as he has a body, sense, soul, and mind, ^B by which, as parts, he has appropriated to each one in his own way the extremity akin to it generally, according to the aforesaid manner, he has divinely recapitulated all things into himself, having shown that the whole of creation is one, just like another man, completed by the meeting of its parts with one another and inclining toward the totality of existence, according to the one, simple, and indefinite notion of production out of non-existence, and indifferent, by which the whole of creation can receive one and the same reason, which is completely indistinct, having "Non-existence" prior to "Existence." ^C For all things, according to the true reason, coincide with one another in every way whatsoever, even if not everywhere, seeing that they are after God and have their existence from God through generation; and there is nothing at all among beings—not even those that are highly prized and surpass others—that is naturally entirely free from the general relation to what is supreme, nor again is the most worthless among beings found to be completely left behind and devoid of the general relation to the most worthless things by nature. For whatever things are distinguished from one another by their own peculiar differences, these are united by general and common identities, ^D and they are constrained by a certain general reason of nature toward the one and same identity with one another; thus, genera are essentially united to one another, having unity, identity, and individuality. For nothing of those things which are universal, comprehensive, and general is in any way divided together with those things which are particular, comprised, and special. For that which cannot naturally constrain those things which are separated can no longer be general, but is separated along with them, and departs from its own singularity and unity. For every genus, according to its own reason, exists wholly and indivisibly in all the things subject to it, and what is private to individuals is seen to be whole generally. Species, likewise, according to genus, being freed from the variety that is in difference, receive identity with one another. Individuals, however, receiving the connection with one another according to species, stand everywhere as one and the same with them, being immutable by the community of nature. And an unerring witness of these things is the true theologian, the great and holy Dionysius...

the Areopagite, who in the chapter on the Perfect and the One, in his treatise *On Divine Names* ^A, discourses as follows: "For neither is the multitude devoid of unity, but that which is many by its parts is one in the whole, and that which is many by its accidents is one in the subject, and that which is many by number or by powers is one in species, and that which is many by its species is one in genus, and that which is many by its processions is one in its principle; and there is nothing among existing things that is in any way devoid of unity." And simply, to sum it up, the definitions of all things distinguished and particular are, as they say, contained within the definitions of things universal and general, in such a way that the definitions of things more general and more universal are grasped by wisdom, while the definitions of particular things, which variously inhere in the definitions of the general, are grasped by prudence, by means of which they are first unfolded and, having been released from the symbolic variety in the underlying things, they are gathered into unity by wisdom, having attained to an identity with the things more general. Now the Wisdom of God and the Father, and his Prudence, is the Lord Jesus Christ, who holds together both the universal things of existing beings by the power of wisdom, and contains the completion-parts of these by the prudence of understanding, as the Creator and Provider ^B of all things by nature, leading into one the things that are apart through himself, abolishing the war that exists among beings, and binding all things together in peaceful love and inseparable concord, both those in the heavens and those on the earth, as the divine Apostle says. ^C

Another contemplation on the same difficulty.

Nature is again innovated: the divine nature, because out of immeasurable goodness and love for humanity it willed, with laws of nature dissolved, to be generated voluntarily through human flesh; and our own nature, because in a wondrous way it yielded up to the God who became flesh—who is alien by the law of nature—the flesh that is endowed with a rational soul, which in all respects is the same as ours and unchangeable without sin, and, what is more ^D paradoxical, without the law of the virginity of her who became Mother being in any way diminished by the birth. For the innovation is, strictly speaking, not only that He who was already begotten in an ineffable manner from God and the Father—God the Word—was temporally begotten in the flesh, but also that our nature provided the flesh without seed, and that a virgin gave birth without corruption. For of these, each one, while presenting a manifest innovation, completely hides the ineffable and unknown reason by which it has come to pass, and at the same time demonstrates it; the one by a mode that transcends nature and knowledge, and the other by the argument of faith, by which all things that transcend nature and knowledge are by their nature grasped.

^A Thus, in my opinion, the dilemma has been solved as far as it was possible, and I know of no other way in which I must go through it. It would be up to your philosophy either to approve what has been said, or to discover and express more wisely things that are better than those that have been found by yourself, and to share with me the fruit of a knowledge both sublime and devoid of anything earthly.

Of the same, from his *Second Homily on Baptism*, on the text: "Scripture recognizes a threefold kind of birth, the first from bodies, the second from baptism, and the third from the resurrection."

How is it that this divinely-inspired master seems in these words to have instituted an overly redundant repetition of what he had stated before? For having indicated a threefold birth—the one from bodies, the one from baptism, and the one from the resurrection—he adds, as if forgetting ^B or by way of an expression that appears redundant, a fourth by saying: "The first by that initial and vital insufflation." For, as if he had not mentioned it alongside the other three births, on account of having previously signified it, he added saying: "The first by that initial and vital insufflation."

How, then, the master truly said this will be clearly known by one who has matched him in virtue and has not stood far from his wise understanding of divine matters. But as far as I can understand, according to the weakness of my feeble intellect, that fourth birth which is superadded does not seem to be idle; rather, it seems to complete the aforementioned birth from bodies, and to interpret the divine reasons and modes contained within it. For he who, on account of the first Adam, deigned to become man, and did not disdain to be born for the sake of his sin, signified through his "factitation" his condescension toward him who had fallen, and through his voluntary "generation" his self-emptying for the sake of him who was condemned. By his factitation, he was naturally brought into the same state as man according to the vital insufflation, from which, having received the image of God as man, he preserved untainted ^C the freedom and impeccability of human nature forever; ^D but by his generation according to the incarnation, he willingly took on, in the form of a servant, the likeness of man who is subject to corruption, and, though he was without sin, he willingly suffered to be subject to the same natural passions as us, as though he were liable, he who was sinless. For by both these parts, being joined together, he was composed of two parts, and has become

perfectly the new Adam, bearing within himself the first Adam, ^A unimpaired in both these respects. For having accepted, by the law of condescension, the creation of Adam before the transgression, he naturally received through the insufflation that which was without sin, though he did not receive incorruptibility. But having naturally accepted the passibility of the generation that was instituted after the transgression as a result of condemnation, he did not receive that which is prone to sin; and thus he becomes the new Adam, [226 b] receiving the same creation without sin, while submitting to the same passible generation. For by intertwining both perfectly with each other around himself, according to parts answering to both, he powerfully provided, by means of one another, a mutual and most strong remedy for the defect of the extremity in each; making the second and dishonorable creation the preserver and renewer ^B of the first and honorable one, and placing the first as the constitutive principle and vindicator of the second. I call 'extremities' the incorruptibility of the first and honorable condition, as the principle of lack of sin, and the tendency to sin of the generation, as being the second and dishonorable, since it is the cause of all passion and corruption. Having nowise accepted these into himself during the Incarnation, and having admitted those things that are by them, the Savior made the creation of the condition a preserver, ^C miraculously renewing its incorruptibility by the passion attached to it, in a manner of creation; and in turn, he constituted the condition of generation the vindicator, by its lack of sin sanctifying the state of generation that is subject to passion, so that he might make the condition fully safe, preserving nature by the reason of its divine perfection, while plainly liberating the nature subjected to it on account of the transgression from generation—not being mastered by the way of sowing, which is perhaps adventitious to the rest of the animals on earth. If, therefore, you join creation, formation, and insufflation naturally with the incarnation and generation, [227 a] distinguish them from one another by thought alone, and you will find, according to the great teacher, a fourth generation, completing that which comes from bodies, and receiving this distinction from itself in the manner I have explained, by thought alone. But the state, which is that condition which naturally precedes that superadded generation, whose property is the first and vital insufflation, is conceived by the mind to differ in no way.

Contemplation on the words, "Scripture acknowledges to us a triple kind of birth."

^D And to sum up, if you wish to know the accuracy of the teacher's words, seek what is the principle that causally precedes man's generation, which remains always within its own stability, never departing from it, and what is the mode of his generation resulting from the transgression, according to the pedagogical counsel of God, the end of which is the amendment of the one being instructed and his perfect return to the principle of his own condition; and you will learn clearly how God, when he became man, became perfect in both,

[...the condition he truly had] ^A, wisely leading the mode of the divine counsel back to that which it had in truth from the beginning, and then you will justly admire the master for his insight, for how, by mentally separating those things that are naturally joined, he plainly set forth the whole rationale of the most divine mystery concerning us. For by distinguishing in his mind the generation from bodies through the vital insufflation and the incarnation, he obscurely signified the difference between the mode of generation and the condition of nature. Taking hold of these for our sake, God, who renovated nature—or rather, to speak more truly, innovated it—assumed them and brought them to the pristine honor of incorruptibility through his own holy flesh, which was taken from us and rationally animated; and he further adorned it liberally with deification, from which it was not permitted for it to fall away—like a soul inhabiting a body—from God himself who was incarnate, which surrounded the whole inconfusibly according to the union, and because of his manifestation through it, it received the being hidden only insofar as he became manifest through it and was thought to have departed from his own hiddenness. ^B And what is more admirable than this? That, existing as God by nature, yet deigning to become man by nature, he crossed over the natural limits of neither nature by means of the other, but existing as wholly God, he remained having become wholly man. For he was not prevented from becoming man by being God, nor was he diminished from being God by becoming man, but he remained one and the same, wholly persisting through both, and truly existing naturally as both man and God, neither divided by the integrity of the natural difference of the parts in their essence, nor confused by the singularity of the substance, not having changed into the lower nature, nor having fallen into what he was not. He did not consummate this economy by merely putting forth a guise and form of flesh, and taking whatever other things are said to belong to a subject [without being] the subject itself; but he truly and in reality assumed the human nature itself and joined it to himself according to substance, stably, consistently, entirely, and inseparably, and held it fast by its essential rationale and aim, so that it might not fall away. ^C According to which [nature], as this holy and great teacher says, he also honored our generation, and having truly become man and been generated after the manner of men, that he might loosen us from the bonds of birth, and from the law by which we are accustomed, on account of sin, to be sown and born like grass, and by which we are generated having the same kinship with plants and irrational animals. As the great and most high spectator of mysteries, Ezekiel, says somewhere, having been initiated into the divine mysteries and instructed in the cause of the present economy concerning man, as if speaking to Jerusalem: "Thus saith the Lord to Jerusalem: Thy root and thy birth are of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite: in the day thou wast born, thy navel was not bound, neither wast thou washed in water, nor salted with salt, nor wrapped in swaddling clothes." ^D

^{A B} and thou wast cast out upon the face of the field in the abjection of thy soul, in the day thou wast born; and I passed by thee, and saw thee trodden down in thy blood, and I said unto thee, In thy blood, live; be multiplied, as the bud of the field I have given thee. The Lord, therefore, Who is the healer of nature and the guide to the ancient grace of incorruptibility, came to liberate nature from the condemnation of being brought forth by sowing like grass, and of having life through blood like the rest of animals. He came to show her clearly the beautiful end for which she was created in the beginning, and to trample down the evil to which, as soon as she was made, she had been led astray and had foolishly and unnaturally emptied out all her strength. He came to bind to Himself the power of desire (of which the navel [228b] is the symbol), which has received into the good a fecund habit that is fixed and immutable, and to wash it in water—that is, I say, to wash it of the defilements of ignorance in the wave of the knowledge which is poured around it according to grace—and to salt it with salt, and to wrap it in swaddling clothes, that is, by firmly solidifying with the Spirit the natural activity toward the good for which it was created, to render it pure and incapable of the putrefaction of the passions, and by encircling it with the mantle of the true logoi in the things that exist, after the manner of swaddling clothes, to restrain it entirely from all diffusion.

Another contemplation on the same.

^C Perhaps by the things said, the master, setting forth that the logos and mode of human nature according to its generation is twofold—the one of the soul, the other of the body—has, in his thought, divided the bodily generation into two generations, indicating the soul implicitly as consisting of the divine and vital insufflation, and the body as being from the subject matter from which the body is generated at the same time as the soul in conception. For it is not lawful to assert that the logos and mode of generation are exactly the same in both, since both do not happen to be the same in essence. For of those whose being is not the same to one another, it is evident that the logos and mode of their generation toward one another also differs. But it is right to think that the soul has one logos and mode, by which it comes to be and exists and remains immutably, and the body has another, by which it comes to be and exists and remains joined to the soul.

A brief contemplation toward those who say that souls exist before or after the bodies.

^D Even if the time of generation is the same according to the substance of both, I say, of soul and body, with neither one pre-existing the other, as I have said, according to generation, or existing after, so that it may not...

from a form composed of both, be dissolved in its integrity, then a relative ^A rationale might seem just, by which you might think that the substance of one, as a part existing by itself, precedes the other, which by nature has a completely non-relative union with something else, and therefore never naturally completes the substance of another of a different species in composition with that other, without this coming to pass through corruption and change into that which it was not. For that which pre-existed ^B individually by itself cannot be transferred by nature into the substance of another species. But if that which pre-existed admits of composition toward another for the completion of another species, it does this either entirely according to nature, or contrary to nature. And if indeed it is according to nature, it will never be seen to cease from the composition toward the other which happens for the completion of a different species, because of the force of nature, which cannot desert itself; and by this reasoning, neither will a soul be ever conceived by the mind without a body, nor a body without a soul; and for those who were most intelligent, their wisdom has been turned into folly, and they have been brought ^C necessarily to that which they were striving to avoid. But if it admits of composition toward another contrary to nature for the completion of another species, one of these is corrupted entirely, since it exceeds the bounds of nature, and becomes that which is not naturally prepared to be, and turns into that which it was not. Than which what could be more foolish? But let us return to our subject.

The generation of the soul, therefore, as the teacher says ^D pointedly, does not come from subject matter, as bodies do, but by the will of God through vital inspiration, ineffably and in a way we cannot know, as only its Creator knows. The soul, receiving its existence at conception, is brought along with the body to the completion of one man; whereas the body is made from subject matter—namely, from the other body—through conception, receiving, together with the soul, the composition by which, along with it, the species comes forth. This the teacher declares more clearly elsewhere, saying: "According to the twofold power of the infusion, and the breath being breathed into all, and the Holy Spirit." Therefore, we must distinguish in thought, at the time of conception, the vivifying breath and the Holy Spirit [as pertaining] to the intellectual essence of the soul, and the incarnation and the breathing [as pertaining] to the nature of the body, just as the Fathers say. And the generation of our forefather Adam was produced mystically, having a different rationale of existence and mode of birth for the soul, and a different one for the body, as the divine Scriptures have magnificently instructed us, not allowing the soul and body to be blended together according to nature by one and the same mode of generation, so that the rationale of the essence of each and the mode of generation might be ignored.

^A If, then, the double power of the inbreathing followed upon Adam, concurrent with his generation into existence, what is one to say regarding the combined soul and body of our God and Savior Jesus Christ according to his humanity? This blend, as far as is possible, preserves a great likeness to the first Adam. For just as the Teacher himself says, God took the body from matter—which, being freshly created, already subsisted—and infused life from himself, which the Scripture recognizes as the intellectual soul and image of God, and thus fashioned man; in the same way, taking the body from the undefiled Virgin as if from untainted earth, and infusing life from himself—which the Scripture recognizes as the intellectual soul and image of God—he fashioned his own humanity, or rather, as the almighty Creator, he made man of his own accord for our sake, immutably assuming flesh that was animated intellectually and rationally.

^B In this way, I believe, the Teacher says the Lord and our God hath honored our triple birth—that is, the general modes of our generation into existence, into well-being, and into eternal existence. I refer to the generation from bodies, which is one for both parts through their mutual coexistence—I mean soul and body—yet divided in two because of the different mode of generation for each, through which we receive existence; the second from baptism, through which we bountifully receive well-being; and the third from the resurrection, through which we are changed by grace toward eternal existence. One must therefore apply oneself carefully to the words of the Teacher on account of the calumniators of things rightly established. For the Teacher determines that, by thought alone separating the birth from bodies on account of the reason provided, the Lord received the vital spirit—or rather, the inbreathing according to his humanity, I mean the intellectual soul—along with the body from the ^C undefiled Virgin at the very moment of conception, with not even the slightest moment of time thought to precede it, and not after the conception.

Against those who say that souls exist before bodies.

^D For some say, as I have already said, that souls exist before bodies, while others on the contrary say that bodies exist before souls. But we, treading the middle and royal road according to our fathers, affirm neither the pre-existence nor the post-existence of soul or body, but rather their co-existence, shunning the inclinations toward either side and leaning absolutely neither to the left nor to the right, as the Holy Scripture says, fearing the fear

^A than which nothing is more to be feared, lest, if we say that souls pre-exist bodies and that bodies were invented as a punishment for souls on account of the sins they committed before their bodies, we might justly suspect that sins alone were the cause of this most excellent and noble workmanship, by which God is known and proclaimed in silence, thereby forcing upon God a necessity against His will, for of which constitution He perhaps did not from the beginning even have the plan—hidden as it was before the ages along with the other things. For to say that God has the plans for the production of an essence for things that come to pass against His will does not seem to me to be the judgment or opinion of a prudent man, nor of one who rightly conceives of the majesty of God, who alone is without passions and is truthful, and has nothing at all that is recent, in accordance with the plans of things that have pre-existed in Him, especially things contrary to His will. For all things that in any way exist or are to exist according to their essence were already willed, understood, and ordained by Him beforehand; but to each of the things that exist, He assigns essence and substance according to a suitable and opportune time. ^B Nor, when we see God bringing something into effect, should we suppose that He then began to have the will, conception, or knowledge regarding that matter. God forbid! For this would indeed abound with much absurdity, if what God from the beginning before the ages neither thought of nor ordained to be, nor willed, He should now think of and ordain and will, or—to speak more properly—repent, so that He might accomplish a good; not to mention [the absurdity] that He does not even know the making of those things for which He does not have the pre-existing plans. Rather, we believe that all things are always contained by the will of God through His foreknowledge according to His infinite power, with nothing whatever being newly devised by Him and [thus] receiving essential existence. For I do not think that those who think piously and religiously ought to suppose that God learns the things that are ^C pre-contained within Himself by foreknowledge in infinite power, according to their [individual] plans, through their production into existence. But to us, the ages and times wisely reveal all things being brought about according to the pre-ordained and suitable time for each, and being advanced to existence: just as also the divine Apostle says concerning Levi, thus discoursing: "For he was still in the loins of his father" (Heb. vii, 10) before he came into existence. He who, existing potentially in the patriarch Abraham, but at the accomplished time obtaining birth into existence through conception by effect, persuaded us to understand and believe that all things—in sequence and order, according to the ineffable wisdom of God, and at the time pre-intellected and pre-known—receive the condition of existence, that we might understand and believe.

^A All things, therefore, which substantially exist according to essence, or are destined to exist, whether they have been produced or are to be produced, or whether they appear or will appear, pre-exist stably in God as the reasons (λόγοι) in accordance with which all things both exist, have come to be, and endure. Through a natural movement, they draw near—and are more tightly bound—to existence, according to the quality and quantity of the impulse and inclination of the power of choice, receiving well-being through virtue and the straight path—in accordance with the reason in which they consist—or else receiving ill-being through vice and a movement contrary to the reason in which they consist; or, to speak concisely, according to the habit or privation of their natural power of participating in Him who is by nature absolutely ^B imparticipable, yet who, in His infinite goodness, bestows Himself wholly by grace upon all alike, both the worthy and the unworthy, and who produces the continuity of existence just as each is disposed by himself. To these, the analogous participation or non-participation of Him who is properly the Existing One, the Well-Existing One, and the Ever-Existing One, is an intensification and increase of torment for those who cannot participate, and of enjoyment for those who can. For there is absolutely nothing among things that exist for which the reason does not pre-exist in God. But if the reasons of the essence pre-exist in God, then the generation of these is ^C certainly according to a divine purpose. And for those whose generation is according to a divine purpose, their existence according to essence remains immutable, without falling away from the Existing One toward non-existence. But if, after their generation, their existence—which has been established according to essence from the Existing One—is immutable toward non-existence, then their reasons (λόγοι) are found to be stable and firm, having as the only beginning of their existence the wisdom from which and by which they exist, and by which they possess the power to be able to exist stably. And for those whose reasons exist stably with God, the purpose of God—who has made ^D all things—remains unfailing regarding them. For the purpose of God is not at all encompassed by temporal limits, nor does it admit of alteration through change, shifting along with the subjects; and for these, their existences are clearly and indisputably incorruptible. For either God made human bodies by willing them according to His purpose, and they remain through Him, not at all declining toward non-existence, since He always wills that which, with reason and wisdom, was willed according to His purpose—and thus there will not be for them a total passing of bodies into non-existence; or He did not make them according to His purpose, and, not willing it, He was tyrannized, being led by force to their generation, those whose reasons, thus held, He did not manifest. And if, being tyrannized, He came—beyond His purpose—to make bodies not willing it, then obviously reason and wisdom did not guide the generation of these. For that which happens beyond the divine purpose is totally deprived of reason and wisdom.

^A And that which is totally deprived of reason and wisdom is evil alone, whose existence is characterized by non-existence; may it never enter our minds to think that God is the framer of such a thing, nor still less to proclaim it openly and, to our own ruin, dare to believe it. And who is it that has tyrannized God—if indeed He has been tyrannized—and is it at all permissible to say that He did something contrary to His purpose when He did not will it? And how can He who has been tyrannized be God, if He establishes the condition of things unto destruction, by necessity and contrary to His purpose? Let those who hold such an opinion dare to speak out. For they would either say that God made these things, thereby admitting the most grievous blasphemy by imposing necessity upon God, as if He had done something contrary to the purpose of His will; or they would say He did not make them, and thus they would be caught introducing, after the manner of the Manichaeans, another principle that made these things. For the doctrine of pre-existence is entirely characteristic of those who set two opposing principles against each other. By the grace of the most merciful God, the deep darkness of annihilation has engulfed them and thrust them into complete oblivion, since they could not bear the ^B radiance of the truth preached by our holy Fathers.

I marvel, however, how the mystery of Christ our true God—to say nothing for the moment of many other things that could be said, for fear of dragging out my discourse—does not induce them to eagerly shake such an opinion from their minds. For if the mystery of Christ is more mysterious than all other divine mysteries, and is that which defines the perfection of all things, whether existing or to exist, according to every manner of understanding, and stands above all boundaries and ends; and if this mystery teaches ^C that the body taken from us, and coessential with us, is and exists after being united in subsistence with the word of God who was incarnate and became perfectly man, with which He was also taken up into heaven, above every principality and power and virtue and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come, and is now seated with God and the Father even unto the endless ages, having passed through all the heavens and having become superior to all, and will come again for the transformation and reconfiguration of all things and for the salvation of our souls and bodies, just as we have believed, and believe, and may we always remain in the faith ^D — who then is so rash and bold, and so habituated to petulantly litigating against clear and manifest truths, that he would even lightly think that bodies are ever to pass into non-existence, according to the progress toward that which is perfect?

^A And does he not believe that the Lord Himself and God of all is with a body, both now and forever, He who grants to others as well the faculty and power to make progress, and leads all and invites all to His own glory—as far as that is possible by the power of the incarnation—as the Author of salvation for all, cleansing away the stains in all?

But he is not led to the deposition of the body by those ^B as though they were models of His own perfection, even if they should dare to think this at all. For He who is by nature alone most perfect and the Author of all perfection does not follow others toward perfection, nor does He possess that which is perfect as something insighted through progress, nor does He wait together with others to receive perfection. He is in no way akin to any of the beings that exist in the need of progress, such that He Himself would then lay aside the nature of the body when supreme progress brings about the deposition of the body for the rest. If so, He would no longer be the Author and Savior of those who are saved, inasmuch as He would not have mystically shown forth once and for all in Himself the goal of our perfection, but would rather appear as one of those who are being saved and are led and have need of another who would show forth in himself the perfection to which all who have naturally shared in the Word are hastening. But this is not the case. How could it be? Nor does the word of truth ^C tolerate those who say such things. For the divine Apostle calls Him the Author and Perfecter of our salvation, 1 inasmuch as He was incarnate for our sake, so that He might consume our sin in Himself and give Himself as a model and pattern of the conduct according to virtue to all who believe in Him. As a good and wise teacher, He first accomplished in His own person, for our instruction and guidance, the things that must be said and done, having died and risen and been taken up into the heavens, and having sat down with the body at the right hand of God and the Father, in order that we, too, while dying, might firmly hope to rise again and to live a life totally separated from all death and all corruption; to be taken up into the heavens, ^D and to receive honor and glory in God and the Father through His mediating Son, and the blessed and eternal dwelling with Him, but not to expect the deposition of the body in any way whatsoever, because the word of the holy Scripture does not teach us this. Nor have we seen this having occurred in the Author of our salvation. For if it were pleasing to Him that this also should happen, He would have first performed this Himself in His own person, and that together with the rest, to whom He subjected Himself for our sake in His love for mankind, fulfilling Himself according to our nature, so that we, together with others, might hope for this by believing in it. But how, if we could endure it...

if they said this, according to this holy teacher, believe that what is united to God is also saved? ^A “For,” he says, writing to Cledonius, “what is united to God, this also is saved.” Now the body, together with the soul, was united to the Word of God; therefore, the body also shall be saved together with the soul. And again, if the Word of God is incarnate for this reason, according to this divine teacher, so that He might save the image and render the flesh immortal, how can that which is saved be destroyed, and that which has been made immortal die again? Or, to speak more properly, how can that which has been entirely divinized through the mediation of the intellectual soul, which mediates between divinity and the body, and which has received in an ineffable manner, essentialiter and present in its entirety, the substance of the incarnate Word of God—who has also made it His own body and manifested it as such—how can it be destroyed? I am unable to conceive. ^B But for what reason—if this dogma is contained within the mystery of the ecclesiastical faith—is it not included together with the others in the symbol by which the sincere and blameless faith of the Christians was set forth by our holy and blessed Fathers, who were gathered from time to time for the confirmation of the divine dogmas of the holy and apostolic Church of God? That, we leave for the wise to say; but I think it is enough to have said these things against them by way of a digression. Let us now turn to others.

Against those who affirm that bodies exist before souls

To say, O you men, that souls exist after bodies is easy and something that anyone who wishes can do; but to prove what is said by reason is very difficult and laborious, and it will never have a fruitful proof in this question, where study and diligence are required. For if that which according to you is placed as material for human generation is entirely inanimate, it follows necessarily that it is also entirely devoid of vital power. For that which is deprived of the soul, in whatever way it may be considered, is bereft of all vital virtue. But if it is entirely devoid of the soul and of its vital power and virtue, it is manifest that it is dead; and if it is established that it is dead, it neither is nourished nor grows, nor will it be able to subsist in any way, or remain entirely undissipated and coherent. ^D This is proven by the healing of wounds in the body; for when those sons of physicians approach these, if they find a dead body emerging, they first consume it with medicines that devour it, and thus they apply to the wound of the injured body those things that are suitable for restoration, so that, insofar as the living body...

^A is naturally endowed with a virtue that is restorative and a certain power of its own habit to bind together and recall what has been dispersed; whereas the dead body in no way does this, for it has been once and for all deadened and is completely deprived of vital power, and is therefore ineffectual. But how shall that which is by nature scatterable and easily dissolved be maintained, if there is not, as it were by way of a foundation, some vital power previously underlying it in thought, which naturally draws together around itself and constrains what is being scattered, in which it has obtained the lot to exist and to be formed by the power that wisely fashions all things? For in whatever thing, after it has been produced, existence truly survives for the body, in that thing it would certainly and rightly be said to contain also the principle of its existence. For that by whose separation the body is naturally dissolved, with its existence, as is apparent, the body must clearly have also coexisted in generation.

If, however, O you people, being constrained by these arguments, you say that that which is sown for the purpose of procreating a human being is not altogether dead, but that it participates in some vital power, however slight, as having a soul, and that it clearly possesses such a power (for without a soul, no species of life could ever under any circumstances be found in those things that are brought under nature and are embraced within the ever-moving orbit of heaven, and by the logic of reason, no species of life ever exists at all without a soul)—if, I say, you assume that the thing which is sown at conception has some species of life, you have merely indicated a property of some soul, which is constitutive of the essence in which it exists, but which distinguishes it from those things that are not of this kind. ^B And if, being forced by the truth (for it is necessary to urge you keenly), you maintain that the embryo is also endowed with a soul, you must also teach what this is, and what kind it is, and how it is observed or designated by you, since that would be consistent and appropriate. And if you assert that it possesses only a nutritive and augmentative soul, then by this reasoning of yours, the body that is nourished and grows will be that of some plant, and certainly not that of a human being. And how a human being could be the father of a plant, I have no way of understanding, no matter how much I consider it, since it does not at all have its existence naturally from a human being. ^C But if, on the contrary, you assert that only a sentient soul exists in the embryo, then it will be shown that the embryo at conception has the soul of a horse, or of an ox, or of some other terrestrial or aerial animal, and according to you, the human being will not naturally be the father of a human being in the first coagmentation, but of some plant, as I said, or of one of the animals upon the earth. And what could be more absurd or more frantic than this? For to assert that the proper boundaries of existence do not coexist from the first composition of beings according to the natural difference of each, ^D is to confuse everything with one another, and to maintain that nothing of the things that exist is strictly what it is and is called. And what is a greater evil, to cast slander upon...

^A divine wisdom and power will be shown to be most extreme. For if all things that exist in any way possess their perfection, before they are generated, according to the foreknowledge of God within their own logos, it is evident that as soon as they come to be, when they are produced into generation according to their own logos, they will possess that perfection without omission, in the very energy itself. But if beings possess perfection according to foreknowledge, but imperfection according to their production into existence and generation, then either they will not be the very things that were foreknown, but rather some things instead of others, or this would be a clear and manifest weakness of the Creator, who was unable, in accordance with his foreknowledge, to represent most fully that which was foreknown—as it is by nature in its essence—immediately upon generation, in accordance with energy.

But ^B if, dreading these refutations, you take refuge in that final resort, saying that it is not right for the image and divine portion (for so you call the intellectual soul) to coexist with fusion and sordid pleasure, and that it is more honorable to maintain that it is introduced after the forty days of conception, you will be seen clearly to be slandering the Creator of nature, and you will be convicted of incurring, not without cause, the terrible danger of this blasphemy which is manifest. For if marriage is an evil, then obviously the law of nature concerning generation is also an evil; and if such a law of natural generation is an evil, then clearly He who made nature, and gave it the law of generation, will justly be accused according to us. And why, if this is so, do we turn away from the Manichaeans and the heretics before them, who for this reason, and after a fashion this cause alone, posited two principles and denied the God of all things, since we find you yourselves asserting the same thing, even if not through the same ways? But if, because of this, you shrink away for fear of shame from saying that the rational and intellectual soul coexists with the body at conception, then you will not dare to claim that the born child possesses a rational and intellectual soul even after forty days, nor after the nine months of pregnancy, nor indeed after the birth itself, before the forty days of purification. For until then, the child that is born is ^C not permitted to approach the temple of God, as it is determined by the law to be unclean. Thus it remains that, until the completion of the days of purification, you must think—according to the probability of your argument—that the child born does ^D not possess a rational and intellectual soul, but, as I said a little before, possesses the soul of a plant or of some irrational animal from the number of those things which the nature of things comprises. But if you have perhaps taken the occasion for such an opinion from the fact that the great Moses wrote that he who struck a pregnant woman is not to be demanded to pay a penalty, if, before forty days, it should happen that she brings forth the embryo into the light due to the blow, it must be known that the wise Moses is not indicating the entry of the rational soul into the body at that time, but is declaring that the perfect configuration of the one cast into the womb is finished within that time.

^A it signifies this, in the meantime I have written these things in this sense. But regarding all these points, I am fearful of admitting such an account, lest the order of the argument, proceeding as it does in sequence, might justly make me liable to awful charges, insofar as it compels me, from the consistency of the discourse, to say of our Lord and God—which it is forbidden to say, since He truly deigned to become man for us, yet without sin—that he became an inanimate man, lacking a mind, at the conception, and remained in this state for forty days, whereas our holy Fathers and teachers declare explicitly, or rather the Truth itself which speaks through them is affirmed and confirms, that along with the descent of the Word of God at the conception, without any interval of time, the Lord Himself and God the Word was united to the flesh through the medium of a rational soul. ^B He did not, however, receive the rational soul later through the medium of inanimate flesh, nor did He adopt a completely inanimate body or an irrational soul lacking a mind; but He ineffably united to Himself, according to hypostasis, a nature that is perfect and lacking nothing, consisting of a rational soul and body together. Therefore, I especially embrace the opinion of co-existence, and I dismiss the others that diverge in either direction, which are as contrary to the mean as they are to each other, as is consistent; and I hold the Creator of nature Himself as the unassailable witness and teacher of this opinion, in the mystery of the incarnation which He possesses in Himself, He who truly became man, and who confirmed by Himself that nature, as soon as it begins to be, possesses a perfect subsistence according to generation, and who alone initiated the innovation of nature—I mean specifically the conception through seed and generation through corruption, which nature had contracted for itself after the transgression, having fallen from the divine and spiritual increase into a multitude, but He did not innovate the *logos* of nature, ^C according to which it is and is naturally constituted to exist from a rational soul and body.

On how an innovation occurs while the things being innovated remain immutable according to nature.

For every innovation, to speak generally, is naturally suited to occur regarding the *mode* of the thing being innovated, but not regarding the *logos* of nature; for if the *logos* were innovated, it would destroy the nature, as it would not possess the *logos* according to which it exists undefiled. But when the *mode* is innovated, while the natural *logos* is preserved, it demonstrates the power of a miracle, as it proves that nature is acted upon and acts beyond its own law and norm. Now the *logos* of human nature is that it is soul and body, and that the nature is from a rational soul and body, while the *mode* is the order by which it is naturally acted upon and acts, which often turns and changes, ^D but it does not change the nature itself together with it at all. Just as is wont to happen also in any other thing.

^A whenever God desires to renew something concerning His own creation for the sake of the providence of those being provided for, and for the demonstration of His power which passes through all things and extends over all things. For indeed, with the greatness of the miracles and portents ^B performed from of old, He has made use of the mode of innovation; for example, when He transferred the blessed Enoch and Elijah to another form of life, aside from that which is in the flesh and subject to decay, not by an alteration of nature, but by a changing of the manner of its conduct and management; when He commanded water to be multiplied in quantity for the drowning of the wicked men upon the earth, and in the ark showed the first shipman, Noah, living an unmolested life together with wild beasts; when He honored His great servants, Abraham and Sarah, with childbirth beyond the age and the legitimate limit and time of nature for begetting offspring; when He commanded fire to fall from above for the drowning of impious men—though in no way was it diminished by this in its natural reason—when He kindled a non-burning fire in the bush for the sake of calling His servant; when He changed the quality of water in Egypt into blood, while not at all denying its nature, in that it remained water according to nature, although reddened, and when He performed other miracles and portents there, both to provide to the faithful a hope of escaping from the evils by which they were besieged, and to the faithless, a perception of His chastising power, to dissolve the hardening of heart that held them regarding God; dividing the sea with a rod ^C and dissolving the continuity of the water—without it degenerating from its own peculiar nature—both for a passage for those being pursued on His account, and for a checking of those who were impudently pursuing the noble and free; making water sweet with a piece of wood, and raining from heaven bread unknown and unplowed, and suddenly causing a multitude of edible birds to bubble up from the sea, outside the natural order of succession of one from another, for the comfort of those suffering hardship in the wilderness; showing the rock to be a mother of water for the confirmation of the faith of those who were deserting their ranks in the struggles; restraining the river for an unmoistened passage of a God-fearing people; strangely stopping the course of the sun and the moon, ^D and making the ever-moving nature of the one who contains all things [237 ] stand motionless, for the destruction of an impious dominion ignorantly arrayed against God, and before the power of the things seen had reached its end, and for the taking possession of the inheritance truly promised from afar. And all the remaining things which are said to have been performed, both in the land of possession and in the others into which the old Israel came because of sins, God performed by innovating not the reason of existence, but the mode of activity of the nature of the things which were being innovated. With all of which, and with that for the sake of which all these things are, and through which the truly most new mystery of His incarnation for our sake was accomplished, He innovated concerning the mode, but not concerning the reason, the nature

by assuming flesh through the medium of an intellectual soul, being ineffably conceived without seed, and truly born without corruption as a perfect man, having obtained an intellectual soul along with a body from that very conception which cannot be interpreted.

That every nature always possesses its end according to its own rationale.

For every nature, to speak generally, whether intelligible or sensible, or rather simple or composite, in whatever way it exists, never receives the beginning of its generation into existence from a part, nor can it subsist by half a portion. ^B But if the nature is composite, it subsists as a whole, perfect together with its own perfect parts, having no interval of time between itself and the parts of which it consists. But if it is a simple nature—that is, intelligible—it likewise naturally subsists as a complete whole, together at once with its own complete rationales, with absolutely no duration of time separating it from its rationales. For there never was at all any nature among those that exist, nor is there, nor will there be, according to its own rationale, such a thing existing that is not now, nor indeed is it now or will be in the future ^C what it was not before. For those whose rationales with God possessed perfection together with their existence, their production and manifestation into essence according to their rationales are entirely incapable of any addition or defect relative to the existence that they have been allotted. But I think that what has now been said as a digression in the discourse is sufficient, so that those who hold the artificial persuasiveness found in the elegance of words to be equivalent to faith may not be easily swept away into absurd notions.

Why the teacher joined the generation through baptism to the incarnation.

^D With regard to what, and for what reason, the teacher joined the generation through baptism to the incarnation (for this still remains to be examined in the present discourse), I will explain briefly, as I have learned, to the best of my ability. Those who treat the divine oracles mystically, and who, as is fitting, honor them with higher contemplations, say that man was made at the beginning according to the image of God, for the purpose of being entirely generated according to volition in the Spirit, and to receive the likeness that had accrued to him through the keeping of the divine commandment, so that the same person might be a creature of God by nature, but a Son of God and God by grace through the Spirit. For it was not possible for the man who had been created to be otherwise designated a Son of God and God according to deification by grace, unless he had been previously generated according to volition in the Spirit, because of the power of free will inherently and naturally present in him. This, therefore,

^A a deific and divine and immaterial generation, the first man had abandoned, because he preferred to the goods which are intelligible and for the time being hidden from the view of the eyes, the sensory [pleasure] and that which is manifest; and he is condemned to a corporal generation, which is not, strictly speaking, of our own volition, and to a material one, and one to be yielded to fate, by the just judgment of God—for he had willingly preferred the worse to the better, that is, a generation subject to passion, servile, and forced, in the manner of the brute beasts of the earth and of cattle lacking reason, he preferred [it] to the freedom and to a generation free from passion and of [his own] free will and holy; and instead of the honor with God and the divine and ineffable [honor], he desired to trade for an equality with the senseless beasts and for a relegation into dishonored material. ^B Wishing to liberate man from this, and to lead [him] back to the divine blessedness, the Word, the craftsman of human nature, truly becomes a man from men, and is generated corporally without sin for the sake of man, and is baptized, voluntarily undergoing for our sake the generation into spiritual adoption, being essentially God and by nature the Son of God, to the end that he might weaken [the power of] corporal generation. Since, therefore, he who made us, and who alone is Son and Word equal to the Father in deity and glory with the Spirit, for our sake becomes truly a man among us and from us, and is born corporally without sin, and as God by nature accepts the generation from baptism for our sake to be undergone for spiritual adoption, for this reason with the incarnation, as I believe, the Master conjoined the generation from baptism, so that you might interpret this as having been done for the sake of weakening and purging corporal generation. For that which Adam ^C (I mean, [by this] the generation into deification from the Spirit) voluntarily abandoned, in order to be condemned to be generated corporally into corruption, this, according to his will, as good and loving to mankind, in our fall, [the Word] became man, and himself voluntarily condemning himself with us—he who alone is free and without sin—and accepting to undergo the generation from bodies, in which the power of our condemnation existed, he mystically corrected the generation in the Spirit, and having loosed for our sake the bonds of corporal generation in himself, through the generation according to the Spirit he ^D gave to us, who believe in his name, the power to become by volition children of God instead of [children] of flesh and blood. The incarnation, therefore, and the corporal generation followed first on account of my condemnation in the Lord, and thus the generation through baptism in the Spirit followed, for my salvation according to grace and restoration, or, so that I may speak more clearly, regeneration, by which God joins together around me the reasons of my existence and of my well-being, and draws together that division and distance of these [two] which had been made by me, and through these things wisely drives [me] toward the reason of eternal existence, according to which men no longer beget nor are begotten, when the order of the things that are seen has reached the end of generation through the great and common resurrection, which will generate man into immortality according to an immutable subsistence,

and with which he will receive by grace that he not suffer corruption according to essence. But if it pleases you, let us briefly commemorate the points of what we have discussed. We have the bodily generation of our Savior divided in thought into the principal reason of nature, and into that which now again exists among us, into which he died; and again divided into the natural reason of generation and into the mode of generation; beyond that, even into the diverse modes of the essential origin of soul and body; and in addition to this [239b] into the conception without seed and the generation without corruption. It is for you, then, as just judges of the things said, to approve the better of the proposed opinions.

Of the same, from the same discourse, on: "Why do you seek remedies that will benefit nothing? Why a critical sweat, when perhaps the exit is near?"

From the same discourse, on: "For Christ does not often love to have something stolen from Him, even if He is exceedingly philanthropic."

What then, some say when they reach this point in the discourse, if God is exceedingly philanthropic, and a never-failing fountain of philanthropy, such that it cannot in any way be diminished by those who draw from it, why does He not love to have something stolen from Him? For thus His philanthropy would shine forth all the more, not being exhausted thereby.

that which gives place to those who wish to steal something, especially when the theft is salvific, and whenever they might wish it. To these, as God grants the word, we reply that this very thing is full of benignity, or rather is benignity itself; and toward those who wish to steal something, it is the most lucid proof of salutary providence, in not allowing those who wish it to steal from Him too often, lest perchance, through the easy alienation of salvation, the loss of the gift should consequently become very easy—a gift which, clearly, could be recovered with no effort—and so that those who have received the gift might not become ignorant of a firm and stable state in the beautiful, while their souls easily slip into wickedness because of the ease of possessing the beautiful, which is despised for its cheapness. ^B

From the same, from the Sermon on Pascha, on the text: "Naked in simplicity and a life devoid of artifice, and exempt from every covering and protection. For it was fitting that he who was first created should be such."

What this great teacher secretly reveals by these words, I say that only those know who have been granted a grace of wisdom and knowledge equal to his; those who, after they have cleansed the intellectual eyes from all the filth of passions and material affection, have been able to perceive the ray of true knowledge in all things, through which, in a simple and, as far as it is possible, uniform manner, they draw back the mind from the multitude, and encompass the entire knowledge of existing things with a simple intelligence. But we, whom the darkness of ignorance still hinders from the perception of truth, on account of the agitation of the mind regarding only fluctuating things, just as a blind man, groping with both hands for rubbish, not infrequently finds something precious, so we too, with our infirmity, undertake to say something about the present question. And we say absolutely nothing else than what God has placed in our hands, according to what is written, to nourish, according to our strength and faculty, you, our good fathers; that is, a simple and modest contemplation, convenient for us, established by ^C an argument progressing with a gait more palpable than firm and sure to our intelligence; one that might invite the paternal blessing, lest by wandering physically through the field of sensible things in the manner of Esau—not at all in a way convenient to our nature—we be deprived, because of our slowness, of the blessing ready for the father who is fed, or again, by a heart lifted up with pride, while seeking greater power, we receive harm from those who still inhabit our mountain of contemplation, in the manner of Israel, of whom the Law narrates that certain ones broke ^D through and ascended the mountain, and the Amorite who dwelt in that mountain came out and wounded them. I suspect, therefore, that the distinction of the

^A temperament of the human body in the case of our forefather Adam, compared to that which is observed in us today and holds sway, is what the Teacher wishes to indicate when he says these things: that, at that time, man was not torn apart by qualities contrary to one another and mutually destructive according to the temperament of the body, but remained in a state of quiet, untouched by any flux or reflux, and free from the constant change in one direction or the other caused by the predominance of qualities, inasmuch as he was not lacking in grace-given immortality, and did not possess the corruption that now lashes him with its own goads; rather, he possessed a temperament of body suitable to him, which was bound together by harmonious and simple qualities. According to this state, the first man was naked, not as being without flesh and body, but as not having that coarser temperament which makes flesh mortal and unyielding. According to this great teacher, he certainly lived in such a way that the good natural disposition of his body, ^B once essentially bestowed upon him, would not vanish, and he himself would not stand in need of a covering; for, being subject to no passions, he did not fear shame, nor was he subject to cold and heat, which are the primary causes for which the custom of houses and the use of clothing were devised by men.

Another contemplation concerning the same passage.

Perhaps the Teacher also indicates what things were in man at that time by removing from him, through the understanding of those things which are now observed in man, those things that are presently in him. For man is now moved either by irrational phantasms of the passions, led astray by the desire for pleasure, or by the theories of the arts, prompted by need due to circumstance, or by natural theories, through the law of nature for the sake of knowledge—none of which, ^C reasonably, bound man at the beginning by necessity, for he had been made superior to all things. For thus it was fitting that the man from the beginning should be—not distracted at all by any of the things that were subject to him, or around him, or within him—and in need only of the perfection of one thing, that is, of the motion toward Him who is above him, I mean God, according to the entire, irresistible, and conquering power of love. For since he was, by grace, subject to no passions, he did not admit the deception of the passions’ phantasms through pleasure; and, being in need of nothing, he was free from the circumstantial necessity of the arts due to want; and, being wise, he was established above the contemplation of nature through knowledge. Therefore, the first man had nothing between God and himself ^D as an object of knowledge, which would hinder his voluntary kinship, through love, in his motion toward God; and for this reason he was called “naked in his simplicity” by the Teacher, as being superior to every inquiry according to nature, and “in an artless life,” as being pure from any life in need of the arts, and “without any covering and impediment,” as being free from the pathetic entanglement of the senses with sensible things, to which he was justly subjected later, having failed in his lack,

and having voluntarily chosen to become empty of all things, having become lower than those to which he was naturally superior. ^A

Another contemplation on the same passage.

Or perhaps “naked,” as the teacher says, of the varied contemplation and knowledge concerning nature, and of the “life devoid of artifice,” being outside the manifold discipline concerning practice and virtue, possessing according to habit the undefiled reasons of the virtues, and “devoid of all covering and impediment,” not primarily needing the mind’s discursive thought concerning sensible things for the understanding of divine matters, having only the simple projection of the life and knowledge that is uniform, simple, and cohesive of those things which follow God, requiring only the movement of the will for its manifestation. Certainly, whoever wishes to raise themselves by philosophical reason from the fall of our progenitor, first begins by the complete removal of the passions, then ^B by the occupation concerning the reasons of the arts, and finally, having passed over the natural contemplation, they peer into the immaterial knowledge—knowledge that has no form whatsoever fashioned by sense, nor thought comprehended by the utterance of speech—just as God at the beginning created the first man, becoming naked in the simplicity of knowledge and in the undistracted life, and by the mortification of the law of the flesh. I would, however, have another, and more sublime, way of contemplating the present question, but for now I shall omit it for the reason I mentioned at the beginning of this discourse.

From the same discourse on the passage: “Annual, however, as the sun of justice, either proceeding from heaven, or circumscribed and defined as to that part which is seen by the eyes.”

Many are the names of our Savior, and multifarious is the mode of ascents according to contemplation for each one, ^C because of the many graspings of concepts that the thing taken as an example for the naming of the Lord is able to admit according to natural contemplation; just as, indeed, the problem now before us has. For since, because of brevity, the discourse cannot yet relate the innumerable modes of contemplation concerning the sun, let us also contemplate that which the teacher contemplated, explaining as best we can the things said by him in a condensed manner. The “year,” therefore, according to our holy and wise teachers, is the circuit of the sun from the same sign to the same sign, containing the fivefold property according to time. For time is divided and gathered into day, and week, and month, and season, and year; and the ^D

year likewise is divided and gathered into hour and day, and week, and month, and season; while the movement pertaining to it ^A remains continuous and without intervals, around which the distinctions observed according to alteration differentiate the continuous and uninterrupted movement of time by numbers. If, therefore, the year among us comes to be in this way according to the course of the sun, then the year of the Lord is entirely acceptable, as it is written, according to the mode of allegory, the whole extension and series of the ages, from the beginning in which it pleased God to bring existing things into essence, and to give existence to those which were not, and through providence—as a certain intelligible sun of the power that holds together the universe—condescendingly enduring to send forth the ray, having deemed worthy various modes for the bringing to fruition of those goods which He sowed as proper to existing things, until the completion of all the ages, in which He shall gather the fruits of His own sowing, free from tares and pure from all chaffy husk and ^B refuse, and the whole rationale of the movement of things that move shall be completed, when those who are worthy have received the promised final blessedness of deification. The Lord, therefore, is called the "Sun of righteousness," as Maker and Finisher of the ages, and as Beginning and End of all things, and as Architect of the fivefold wise order of providential care for those who are being provided for, and as filling all things with eternal light by the indefectible onsets of His goodness, and as making those who expand their own intelligible passages for the reception of His blessed ray mature and edible to God and the Father. ^C The same is also the acceptable year of the Lord, as being fulfilled through all who are saved according to the fivefold movement brought about by Him intellectually, as the Sun of righteousness, which he will assuredly understand who, through the accurate natural contemplation of appearances, gathers the spiritual knowledge of the things which are understood. Proceeding from thence, He has been called by the Master ^D as circumscribed by what is seen, or as "Light from Light," and true God from true God by essence, proceeding in the way of generation from the true Father, or as the same man circumscribed in the form of nature as is seen in us, just as the sun, which proceeds from heaven, is circumscribed by the visible [243a] appearing disk-shaped body.

From the same discourse on the passage: "It is not at all wonderful, if the sheep is sought for most particularly according to each house."

One might say, and reasonably so, I think, perhaps: If Christ is one, who is mystically seen through the law and the prophets and the magnificence of the creation.

how does the law, fulfilling the type of Christ, command many lambs to be sacrificed by the houses of the families? To this we say that if we receive the word itself internally ^A within the ears and eyes of the soul, and if it opens these to receive and contemplate its mysteries, while at the same time spurring us to the destruction of all disobedience and the turning away from all vanity, we would certainly acknowledge the mystical intention of the Holy Scripture, joining to the present passage a similar one from the holy Apostle, who says: "For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified." Just as, then, everyone who has believed in Christ is crucified according to his own capacity and the underlying habit and quality of virtue that he possesses, and he is crucified with Christ—that is, he is spiritually crucified with Christ. For one person adapts and secures for himself the crucifixion in one way of virtue, and another in a different way: one is crucified only to sin in its activity, mortifying it with the fear of God: another is crucified even to the passions themselves ^B and purifies the powers of the soul; another is crucified to the very vanities of the passions, not allowing the senses to be moved to receive any of the distractions resulting from these; another to the thoughts and reflections concerning the passions; another to the deception surrounding the senses; another, by a natural property, is crucified by shedding the relation of the senses to sensible objects; another totally quenches all sensory motion by the cross, so that he has nothing in him at all that acts naturally; and another ceases even from the very activity of the intellect. And, to say something greater: one is crucified by practical philosophy through dispassion and, as if passing from the flesh of Christ, proceeds to the natural contemplation in the Spirit within his soul; another is mortified by contemplation [of nature], through the rejection of the symbolic contemplation regarding created things that takes place in the mind, and is transferred—as if from the soul of Christ—to the simple and unified initiation of theological knowledge ^C into his own intellect; and a third [is transferred] from this into the ineffable and apophatic infinite negation, and as if from an intellect of Christ is mystically raised to His divinity. According to his own capacity, as I said, and according to the grace of the Spirit granted to him according to his merit and worth, each one possesses the Christ who, in accordance with him, makes his sublime ascents through the mortification of all things; and so each of us sacrifices the divine Lamb, as in a house of his own, according to the order of the configuration of virtue appropriate to him ^D, and partakes of his flesh, and is filled with Jesus. For Christ Jesus becomes the personal lamb of each one, according to how each is able to contain and eat him, being personal, as the great herald of truth, Paul,

^A in every manner and according to the grace that is administered, now in this way, now in that, becoming all things to all men, and finding himself as a whole in each one while yet being whole in all.

From the same sermon on: "Whatever of the Word is fleshly and nourishing shall be eaten with the inner parts and the hidden things of the mind, and shall be consigned to spiritual digestion."

God, who established every nature with wisdom, and who secretly implanted in each of the rational essences the primary power of his own knowledge, has also given to us humble men, as a most generous Master, a natural desire and love for himself, having naturally intertwined with it the power of the Word, so that we might be able to know with ease the ways of fulfilling this desire, and by not going astray, might fail to attain the goal for which we strive. Moved, therefore, by this desire, we are urged to seek both truth itself and the wisdom and administration that appears in a well-ordered way in all things, yearning through these things to attain Him for whose sake we received the desire. ^B And those who are lovers of learning and ambitious lovers of truth, having understood this mystically, established for themselves a single school and a diligent constancy of study concerning this, accurately instructed by the very true knowledge and sequence of things, that if in this age they might in some way depict the future truth through pious contemplations, they would also satisfy their desire, having obtained a soul that is better prepared, as it has been well-exercised in these earthly things, so that, without any labor after this life, they will pass over into the future truth, which has already been beautifully sketched out for them through divine thoughts.

Then God and our Savior Jesus Christ will conduct them to that very truth—simple, clear, and freed from every difficulty, symbolic variety, and every obscure riddle— ^C just as, with the practice of virtue, pain, sorrow, and sighing have fled from them because of perfect dispassion, so too with contemplative knowledge, all obscurity and anguish, because of wisdom, are cast out, with the truth itself then laid bare to them, from which they will take its impressions, having received it then as the naked truth. For to everyone who has—that is to say, who has the desire for the things that are to come—it shall be given, and the enjoyment of the eternal good things shall absolutely be set before him. For our God, being rich, never ceases to distribute to those who love him the divine gifts of knowledge, which we cannot even name in this age because of their height and magnitude, if indeed the great Apostle speaks the truth in saying that the ultimate beatitude is higher than every name that is named, ^D indicating that it is supreme not only in this age, but also in the one to come, after the distribution and after the total bestowal of all the gifts, and after the ascension has been made, having been manifested

^A unto the peak of those good things which can neither be uttered by word nor grasped by thought, both of the good things that can be attained in this age and of those that shall appear in the future, and which perhaps may begin to be named and understood by us. For the One who has passed through the heavens ^B, Jesus, the Word of God, having become higher than all the heavens, transfers and moves those who follow him through action and contemplation from the lesser to the better, and from these, again, to things even higher than these; and, to speak briefly, time would fail me if I were to wish to recount the divine ascensions and revelations of the saints, according to the change from glory to glory, until each one has received the deification befitting his own order.

Therefore, this great teacher, knowing that we have a natural desire regarding God, of which we spoke above, exhorts and calls all men through his teaching to the spiritual tasting of the Lamb who was slaughtered for us; and he suggests that we should preserve clearly and usefully the harmony of His members—that is to say, the members of the Lamb—whole and unconfused, lest we be condemned as those who pull apart and mangle the harmonious arrangement of the divine body, or as those who eat the flesh of the Lamb and the Word audaciously and beyond their capacity, or wickedly and contrary to their capacity. Rather, let each one, according to his own capacity and order, and according to the grace of the Spirit which has befallen him, partake of the divine Word according to the significance of each member.

For instance, the head will be partaken of by him who has acquired a faith starting from indemonstrable principles, which is entirely free in its reasoning regarding theology, from which the whole body of virtues and cognitions, being knit together, increases in spiritual growth. The ears will be partaken of by him who receives the divine reasons spiritually with understanding, and who, through them, becomes obedient to God even unto death through his deeds. The eyes, by he who beholds creation spiritually, and, without stumbling, gathers all the reasons, both of sense and of intellect, into one fulfillment of the glory of God. The breast ^C will be partaken of by he who has filled his soul with theological contemplations, according to the great evangelist John, and who, like a perennial spring, piously pours out the reason and manner that encompasses the providence for all things to those who are learning. The hands, again, are partaken of, as is fitting, by him who commits none of the actions divinely forbidden, whether through sloth or through negligence, but keeps all the powers of his soul ready and intent for the fulfillment of the divine commands. The belly, indeed, for he who has in his soul that which is ever-gushing, and which abounds in spiritual contemplations, and who possesses an unquenchable and most fervent love of the passionless desire to be united with God. The inwards, in turn, will be partaken of fittingly by he who, through a more hidden inquiry and cognition of the intellect ^D, investigates the depths of God and is filled with ineffable mysteries. He will dare

^A partaking of the lower parts of the Word wisely is he who stands rationally against matter, and maintains his flesh altogether undefiled along with his soul, and by his virtues fashioning the whole Word, who became flesh, entirely and without omission in himself. One will partake of the thighs who has the Word placed upon the passible part of the soul, and who utterly extirpates its pro-material motion; of the knees, on the other hand, is he who, in accordance with Providence, inclines mercifully toward those lying down and wavering [(246 a)] in the faith, and who imitates the condescension of the Word toward us. Additionally, one should partake of the shins and feet who maintains the foundations of the soul unshaken and immovable in faith, virtue, and knowledge, and who, according to his aim, presses on toward the prize of the upward call, and who, with the Word, leaps over and bounds across the mountains of ignorance and the hills of wickedness. But who shall be able to enumerate all the purposes of our Savior God for our sake, according to which He has made Himself edible and participate-able in a manner analogous to each person? For the Lord has, in addition to all these, locks of hair, and nostrils, and lips, and a neck, and shoulders, and fingers, and everything in our own constitution that is spoken of Him tropologically. Those who are being transformed into the spiritual Word signified toward each and through each member partake of these fittingly and usefully. Thus the Lamb of God is eaten, according to this holy and great teacher, and is given over to spiritual digestion, transforming those who partake into Himself by the Spirit, leading and transposing each of them into the place of the member of Him who was eaten, according to the position of bodily harmony, so that the Word which is in all things may humanely become the essence for the things, He who alone surpasses nature ^B and the Word.

From the same discourse, on: "Mortifying the members that are upon the earth," [(Coloss. III, 5)] and imitating the girdle of John, the solitary, and forerunner, and great herald of the truth.

He who imitates the girdle of John is he who, by the power of the Word, actively constricts the generative power of the soul through knowledge, keeping it undistracted against matter. ^C Solitary, moreover, is he who has acquired a habit pure from the passions. Forerunner, indeed, is he who, through the aid of sincere repentance, announces the justice that follows from it, and through visible virtue, announces the knowledge that is to come to which he is to attain. ^D Finally, the great herald of the truth is he who confirms by his own life the word of teaching preached by him.

^A

From the same discourse, on the text: "And if any disciple is sent to preach the Gospel, let him strive for frugality and simplicity: who, besides having neither money, nor staff, nor a second tunic, must also travel barefoot, so that the feet of those who bring good news of peace may appear beautiful."

The Gospel is a more sublime discourse concerning the Kingdom of God; and the Kingdom of God is a state that is pure of all matter and all the fantasies conceived from it. The disciple, therefore, who is sent to preach the Gospel is fittingly one who shows himself in his ways to be entirely alienated from this present world. In that he is without money and without a staff, and has but one tunic, he circumcises in himself the desire for money, anger, and the confidence in any kind of worldly power. He professes a way of life that is artless, unfeigned, simple, and free from all guile, just like a single tunic, without having fastened at all upon the trace of his soul—as if it were a shoe—any sign of mortality; for he is a messenger of the great peace, a herald of a state that no longer fears the war of the passions nor shrinks from the death of the body. Thus, those who look upon him with discernment ^B are able to see, by the immutability of his consistent virtue, the most becoming conduct and stability of the angelic life in the presence of God.

Another contemplation on the same text.

Perhaps by the simplicity of his discourse, and by imitating the girdle of John, and again by the ability to eat the Pascha in an evangelical manner, the Father ^C has doctrinally signified the differences among those who partake of it, and the very modes of the Pascha itself. For the discourse of the Old Scripture hands down three Paschas: one that is performed in Egypt, another in the wilderness, and a third in the land of promise. Egypt, then, according to one way of thinking, signifies this world, allegorized ^D as it is; the wilderness, likewise, according to another of these contemplations, allegorically denotes the state of souls after death; and the land of promise designates the age to come. For there are three places and states in which we humans exist: this world, in which we are born and receive our being; the place to which we go after death; and the age to come, in which we are enclosed with both souls and bodies. As long, therefore, as we dwell in this world, we celebrate the Pascha in Egypt, while we are being cleansed of the stains of sin; but when we have finished this life through death, we celebrate another Pascha as if in the wilderness, as we contemplate more clearly the reasons of existing things, stripped of symbols and enigmas and of the variety of the senses, intellectually and cor-

corporally learning ^A. And again, in the age of divine proclamations to come, we celebrate the Passover, eating immediately the most ultimate Word of Wisdom, having been changed into which, we are deified by grace, having no transition to another Passover of any kind whatsoever, except that even here it is possible for the property of the aforementioned places to be represented in an image according to the state of each. For the life of each one of us provides, as it were, an image of the place in which it dwells. For instance, if we stoutly pursue what is called practical philosophy, we duly observe the Passover in Egypt, dwelling among the Egyptians yet not being Egyptians ourselves, as we are in the flesh but not warring according to the flesh. ^B If, however, we piously exercise natural contemplation in the Spirit, making the faculties of the soul weapons mighty in God for the casting down of strongholds and every height exalted against the knowledge of God, and for the contemplation of the spiritual principles in existing things—as though stripped of the body and free from the deceitful imagination of the senses—making our journey toward the divine proclamations intellectually, we are in the wilderness, I mean the state cleansed of passions and of every material imagination. If, finally, we give form to the theological initiation with ineffable motions of the mind, not being ignorant, as far as it is possible for human beings, of what is the breadth and length and depth and the excellence of the magnitude of the wisdom of God toward us, we are in the land of promise. Therefore, I think that by the distinction of the three persons the Master is hinting at practical, natural, and theological philosophy, through which each one, according to the power that is in him, appropriately eats the intellectual Passover.

From the same discourse, on the text: "If you are somebody, Rachel or Leah, a patriarchical and great soul, steal also the idols of your father, whatever you may find, not that you may keep them, but that you may destroy them; but if a wise Israelite, translate them to the land of promise.”

Rachel, as they say, is interpreted as "lamb" or "she who pastures," and Leah is interpreted as "wearied" or "weariness." Rachel, therefore, is pastured and pastures, is led and leads, according to the meaning of the name. Rachel, then, is every contemplative soul that is pastured and led by the law of God as a lamb, and by the law of God pastures and leads her own movements and thoughts, and the passions of the flesh, ^D subjecting them for a time to the fruitfulness of virtue, and thus, after having entered into knowledge, completely destroying them. Leah is every soul that is strenuous and labors for the sake of virtue, which every pursuer of divine philosophy most especially receives into himself in marriage. An Israelite...

^A is the contemplative mind that transfers the thoughts of this age to the land of knowledge, after the example of that great Jacob, who transported all the substance of Laban to the land of the fathers. For just as that admirable Jacob, as it is handed down, cast peeled rods into the water-channels and caused the drinking sheep to conceive by them, so every mind that is most wise in the Spirit strips the diviner reasons of things from their surrounding material and subjects them to the contemplative modes of knowledge, teaching every learner both to shape the state of incorporeal things and the movements of his own soul. Therefore, for those who strive for virtue through the labor of practice, the patriarch is Leah; for those who rationally cultivate virtue through natural contemplation, it is Rachel, as one obediently governed by the law of God and gently leading according to it. But for those who pursue the height of knowledge according to spiritual contemplation, ^B Jacob is the one to be praised with exceptional acclaim—that is, those who look upon and know the things that are seen, not exactly as they appear, but as they are represented to the intellect, and with the thoughts gathered therefrom, they pass on as rich into immaterial and incorporeal knowledge.

From the same discourse, on the words: "If you are Simon the Cyrenian, take up the cross and follow." Simon means obedience, but Cyrenian, as they say, is interpreted as a ready mind. ^C Whoever, therefore, is ready to obey the Gospel and willingly undergoes affliction for the sake of virtue through the mortification of his earthly members by way of practical philosophy, has become a Simon the Cyrenian, pursuing voluntary virtue, bearing the cross upon his shoulders and following Christ, showing a conversation of life pleasing to God that is utterly turned away from earthly things.

From the same discourse, on the words: "If you are crucified as a thief, acknowledge God as a righteous man." The righteous thief crucified together with Christ ^D is every man who suffers evil for his sins as one liable, yet suffering evil together with the Word himself who suffers evil innocently for his sake; he bears it with grateful remembrance of the benefit, acknowledging the Word to be present according to the providence of just judgment; he confesses the fault for which he suffers evil, and prays that, just as the Word, though innocent, shared his passion with him, so he might be willing, though he is unworthy, to share his own joy and delight with him through himself, and might graciously count the mortification from circumstance as his voluntary virtue, when the wise coverings of the Word—which have reached the end of their [purpose]

^A light of the kingdom, the unapproachable, shall appear. Thus, the mortification of the bodily members, which surrounds him as he suffers on account of sin, is transformed through grateful thanksgiving into a voluntary virtue; and through this [virtue], being released from many debts incurred by sin, he rightly enters with the Word into the land of knowledge—I mean Paradise—where, having arrived, he shall know the cause of the condemnation and suffering in which we are currently confined. An ungrateful thief, on the other hand, is one who suffers miserably through sin as a debtor, and—because of a contentious mind—does not recognize the Word of Justice who, in His love for mankind, suffers with him without being a debtor; rather, he blasphemously rejects the word of judgment which, in accordance with providence, was justly decreed for him. Since he did not recognize the Word who was condemned along with him—even though He was condemned through [His own] will—and did not seek forgiveness for the things in which he transgressed, he is dismissed as an alien to the kingdom, having received no promise that he would ever attain it from the Word. ^B

Another contemplation on the same subject.

And again, a grateful thief is one who, even if he comes to the realization of his transgressions only when he has reached the very end of his present life, prudently recognizes the word of divine judgment that is being fulfilled in him here—which was justly decreed for him—and sincerely asks for forgiveness from the depths of his soul for the things in which he has sinned. An ungrateful thief, however, is one who, having come to the very end of his present life, blames the law and definition of God—which were wisely established for the separation of the soul from the body—as if they were not well-given, out of a love for life. ^C

Another contemplation on the same subject.

And again, since each one of us is dual in nature, consisting of soul and body, he is a thief who, in accordance with the law of each of the two things he is composed of, mystically is crucified with the Word for the sake of virtue. He treats the law of the flesh as an ungrateful thief, opposing the Word of virtue, but possesses the law of the spirit as a grateful thief, accepting the Savior Word through the methods of practical philosophy, even if they are accompanied by great labor; with Him, he enters joyfully into the place of refreshment, filled with all knowledge, having been entirely set free from the mindset of the flesh. ^D

Another contemplation on the same subject.

And again, a grateful thief is one who has been deemed worthy to be crucified with Christ through the full and complete mortification of the passions, and who is crucified with Him on the right side—that is to say, one who pursues every virtue with reason and knowledge, and is unhindered in all...

^A relationships, maintaining his life and having no motion at all that deviates by any severity from the gentleness of the Word.

On the other hand, the wicked thief is he who, for the sake of glory or grander gains, deceitfully simulates a life established according to virtue by specious means. Instead of every virtue and knowledge, he busies himself only and solely in conversation with outsiders with the flatterer’s word; but towards his intimate companions, he is altogether perverse in will and morals and utterly illiberal, having a mouth that must be prudently gagged, especially if he is a slanderer of the way of God. For perhaps, warned by his reprover, he will cease from slandering the Word through his own conduct, just as happened on the cross to the thief who had shamelessly uttered blasphemy. For his not speaking back to the one rebuking him is a sign ^B that he received the word that was spoken in silence.

In whatever way of contemplation, then, we are crucified together with Christ, let us strive, while we are there, to appease the Word who is crucified together with us, and to receive the truthful announcement of rest, once our conscience has been purged by thoughts that rebuke it—if indeed “today” signifies the present day of this age (for, “Today,” he says, “you will be with me in paradise”), while “tomorrow” signifies the future age, in which there is no remission of sins to be expected, but only the retribution of life that corresponds to the worth of what each has lived.

From the same discourse, on the words: “If you are Joseph of Arimathea, ask for the body from him who crucified it.”

The body of Christ is the soul, or its faculties, or the senses, or the body of each individual, or the members of the body, or the commandments, or the virtues, or the reasons of the things that have been done, or, to speak more truly and simply, in private and in public, all these things and each of these things is the body of Christ. The devil, however, crucifies this—that is, all these things—in anyone who admits such a crucifixion of them, preventing them from operating according to their nature.

Joseph is explained according to the Hebrew language as “Addition,” and Arimathea as “Take away that.” What then? A person who has the additions of faith and is grown in the ways of virtue, and who has cast away all the deceit of material things from himself, this is the spiritual Joseph. He is able to take the body of Christ and bury it honorably and place it ^D within his heart, which has been hewn out of faith as from stone, making his own body, through grace, as the body of Christ, and his body's members weapons of righteousness for God unto sanctification; he subjects the senses of the body to the soul according to the innate reason for the sake of natural contemplation in the spirit, and makes them ministers to the soul, preparing them for the completion of virtues, and makes the soul itself equal in power to the faculties

of the soul, proving these same commandments to be the natural operations of the soul, and through the immutable and stable habit according to virtue, being aroused to the understanding and reception of the more divine reasons hidden in the commandments, ^A and as if with a certain shroud wraps the primary Word—from whom and through whom and in whom all things proceed—in the spiritual discourses concerning this age. He who thus maintains this seemly order is Joseph, mystically entombing the mystical body of Christ.

Another contemplation on the same.

Another contemplation on the same.

From the same discourse, on: "Even if you be Nicodemus, the nocturnal worshipper of God, anoint him with myrrh (51)."

From the same discourse, on: "Even if you be a certain Mary, or the other Mary, or Salome, or Joanna, shed tears at dawn. See first the stone removed, and perhaps also the angels, and Jesus himself (52)."

itself, from which the Word frees his own followers, in every respect placing them above those things subject to time. ^A The other Mary is every contemplative soul, which by means of true knowledge has acquired, through grace, kinship with the Word. Salome, moreover, which is interpreted as "Peace" or "Most Full," is every soul calmed by the casting away of the passions, and which, through an abundance of practical virtues, subjects the mind of the flesh to the law of the Spirit, and through the fulfillment of contemplative spiritual thoughts, wisely comprehends, to the extent of its capacity, the knowledge of the things that exist. Joanna, furthermore, which is explained as "Dove"—a mild, bile-free, and fecund creature—is every soul that, through gentleness, has put off the passions and possesses within itself a fervent fecundity of the Spirit in knowledge. ^B These women weep at early dawn, that is, they pour forth gnostic tears while they seek the Word, the most primary source of all virtue and knowledge. And first they see the stone removed from the door of the sepulcher, which is the dullness of the darkness of the Word that weighs upon the heart; then the angels, that is, the natural reasons of the things that exist in the Spirit, silently proclaiming the Word, the cause of all things.

Another contemplation on the angels.

Another contemplation on the same.

From the same discourse, on that which says: «Be like Peter or John; hasten to the tomb, running at the same time and competitively, struggling in an honorable rivalry.» Peter is every man who acquires for himself the foundation of faith in Christ through the way of his life; but John is he who, on account of much gentleness

^A and the pure sincerity of heart derived from this, is loved by the Word, and to whom, for this reason, the treasures of wisdom and knowledge have been entrusted, and who, by reclining upon the breast, receives from Him the power of theology out of the hidden divinity of the Word himself. These men run against one another, the one striving to surpass the contemplation of the other by his virtuous action, and the other hastening to outstrip the action of the other by his gnostic contemplation. Yet they run together in their purpose, each of them being equally successful regarding his own good.

Another contemplation on the same subjects.

From the same, on the passage: "Even if, like Thomas, you are left behind by the disciples to whom Christ appears, when you see, do not disbelieve. But if you do disbelieve, believe those who tell you. If not even them, then at least be assured by the impressions of the nails."

Another contemplation on the same.

^A the disposition—which the passionless, simple, and ineffable reasons of knowledge receive—resound loudly of the resurrection of the Divine Word that took place within the soul according to its deification, faithfully testifying to and demonstrating the passionlessness of the God-like state. He who has not experienced this would not believe another who speaks to him about it, just as even Thomas did not believe the apostles when they told him of this resurrection, until he himself had experienced the test through his own suffering.

From the same discourse, on the words: "If he should descend into hell, descend with him. Know also the mysteries of God designated there, and what is the reason for the double descent."

The spiritual man, seeing everywhere that the Word of God exists inviolate, follows Him through contemplation, perceiving with intelligence the art of universal providence. Thus, he also descends with the Word who descends into hell—not for the sake of evil, obviously, but in order to investigate and learn the mystery of God’s descent to the dead, and to be taught the wonderful reason for what is taking place and being accomplished there.

^B

Another contemplation on the same subject.

Or again, since hell is every sin, which renders the soul obsessed by it dark, deformed, and lost, he who discourses on the passions descends with the Word of the teaching into hell, enlivening through the Word the virtue that has been mortified by each separate wickedness and leading it to resurrection, and forcefully shattering with the Word the bonds of the state of matter to which souls are subject. Now the reason for the double descent, according to the obvious interpretation, is, regarding the first purpose, that He might save souls together with their bodies on earth through faith and a pure manner of life, and that after the Word has descended into hell, He might be able to save—through faith alone—the souls of those who died previously, without their bodies; and regarding the second purpose, that the habit and activity of wickedness might receive from the Word the power to return to virtue and knowledge.

^C From the same discourse, on the words: "If he should ascend into heaven, ascend with him. Join yourself to the escorting or receiving angels: command the gates to be lifted up."

He who, because of the abundance of knowledge and the richer participation in the Holy Spirit, has sufficiently penetrated—as far as was possible—the reason of providence, and has grasped its art, ascends from earth together with the Word who is ascending into heaven, penetrating gnostically the nature of all things provided for—both visible and invisible—together with their reasons. ^D

^A And having arrived at the state of cessation, entirely without impulse or motion—that toward which it was most especially straining—by every reason and method it is taken up, and led away from those reasons of providence that accompany things—like certain angels—into the region of the ineffable reasons of theology and of the mysteries. And so, by means of these incremental ascents, ^B it elevates the intellectual gates of the soul more highly for the reception of the most divine Word.

Another contemplation on the same.

And differently again, he who ascends along with the Word is he who rises from the practices of active philosophy, as if from a certain earth, into certain heavens—those spiritual ones of knowledge according to contemplation—being elevated on high along with the Word who draws him upward divinely.

Another contemplation on the same.

And to speak even more mystically of these things: he who is able, from the knowledge according to the dispensation—from which the world of the flesh of the Word has come to be with the Father—to be led up to the conception of the glory that existed with the Father before the world of the incarnate Word, he in truth has ascended into the heavens with God and the Word, who for his sake had descended to earth. ^C Having fulfilled the measure of knowledge possible for human beings in this age, he has become God to the extent that He became man, by being exalted to such a degree by divine ascents for the sake of God, just as God, for the sake of man, had descended, having emptied Himself without change to the extremity of our nature.

By the same, from the discourse on the New Sunday, on that passage: “And the tabernacle of the testimony is renewed, and with very great expense, which God showed, and Beseleel finished, and Moses erected” (Exod. xxxvi, 1 et passim).

Let us look at how the teacher has interpreted for the present occasion the manifold rationale of contemplation concerning the tabernacle. The mystical tabernacle of the testimony, therefore, is the mystery-filled plan of the incarnation of God the Word, which God and Father, having willed, showed, and which the Holy Spirit, ^D while prefiguring it through the wise Beseleel, assisted in completing, and which the intelligible Moses, the only-begotten Son of God and Father, labored to perform himself, having fastened human nature to Himself in a union according to hypostasis.

Another contemplation on the same.

Furthermore, the tabernacle is also an image of the whole of creation, both intelligible and sensible, which God and Father...

^A conceived as mind, and the Son as Word fashioned, and the Holy Spirit brought to perfection. And again, the tabernacle is an image of the sensible nature alone, and solely of man who consists of soul and body, and again of the soul alone, which the Word contemplates by itself, being contemplated according to the reason appropriate to each.

From the same sermon, on the text: "But the kingdom of David is renewed, and not once, but first when he was anointed, and afterwards when he was proclaimed king." ^B In the same way, let us also receive the great David, the prophet and king, adorned with the august name of spiritual and mystical sense, as the teacher contemplated him in the present passage. David, therefore, is the intellectual, true king of Israel and of Him who sees God, Jesus Christ. For in his first coming, he was anointed according to the appearance of humanity, as the teacher says elsewhere, anointing humanity with divinity and making it what the anointing is; but in his second and glorious manifestation, he is, and is proclaimed, God and Lord and king of all creation. ^C

There are those who inquire into the present sermon, saying: "Why, after saying that the day of the resurrection surpasses all festivals on earth—not only human ones and those that come about on earth, but even those that belong to Christ himself and are celebrated in Christ—does the teacher, as if forgetting his own stated opinion, prefer the day of the dedication to it, saying: 'More sublime than the sublime, and more admirable than the admirable,' so that on this account the teacher might appear to himself to be an adversary?"

To this it must be said that the teacher himself, in the same sermon, after some intermediate remarks, says: ^D "The Word does not want you to remain ever in the same state, but to be set in motion by a perpetual and praiseworthy movement, and to be a new creation entirely." Therefore, just as we perceive that one who is being renewed becomes higher than himself and more God-like as he is purified by advances in virtue, so must we also believe that every festival day that we conceive of in us and through us becomes higher than itself, as the mystery signified through it brings its own power in us to perfection. Rightly, therefore, did the teacher call the new Sunday more sublime than the sublime, since it is always being exalted together with us and surpassing itself. For the resurrection, that is to say the first Sunday, secretly through its own mystery...

grants to those who celebrate this spiritually a life free from every mockery and vanity that attaches itself to matter, while the new Sunday brings them additionally into the participation of the full enjoyment of the divine goods, the first-fruits of which that former had offered. ^A

Another contemplation on the same.

Another contemplation on the same.

From the same discourse, on: "I hate also the familiarity that is contracted through the air."

From the same [teacher], from his discourse on holy Pentecost, on: "With one day excepted, which we have taken from the future age, being both the eighth and the first, or rather, one and indissoluble. For the sabbatismos of souls here must end there."

^A the knowledge mystically initiated into it. But lest, by going through each one, I make the discourse burdensome, let us examine that which appears more exalted than the others. For those who are skilled in divine matters posit three modes. The whole reason of the generation of all rational essences is seen to contain the reason of existing, of existing well, and of always existing; and that the first, that is, of existing, has been given to beings essentially; the second, that of existing well, to them by will, since they are masters of their own motion; and the third, that is of always existing, has been bestowed upon them by grace. And they hold the first to be of the faculty, the second of activity, and the third of the preservative virtue. ^B Thus, the reason of existing, which has only the faculty of activity by nature, can by no means possess that very activity most fully without the resolve of the will; but the reason of existing well, having only this acting of the natural faculty from the will, does not entirely possess the full faculty without nature; and the reason of always existing, encompassing generally those that precede it—the faculty of the one and the activity of the other—does not inhere in things that exist either naturally, according to its faculty, nor indeed does it follow at all from the necessity of the resolve of the will (for how can that which always exists, and has no beginning or end, inhere in those that have a beginning, end, and motion according to nature?), but it is a limit, rendering nature stable according to faculty, and the will according to activity, changing the reason of neither ^C according to which it is, and defining all ages and times for all things. And this is perhaps, as I think, the mystically celebrated Sabbath, and the great day of rest from divine works, which, according to the Genesis scripture, appears to have neither beginning, nor end, nor generation, being a manifestation, after the motion of those things defined by measure, of those things that are beyond limit and measurement, and an infinite identity of those things that are ungraspable and uncircumscribed after the quality of those things that are grasped and circumscribed. Therefore, however the activity of the will uses the faculty of nature—whether according to nature or against nature—it will receive as its end the good or wretched existence that it possesses, which is the eternal existence in which souls keep Sabbath, resting ^D from all motion. The eighth and first, or rather the one and indissoluble day, is the pure and all-luminous arrival of God, which comes to pass after the cessation of things that are moved; and to those who have used the reason of existing according to nature with their will, it arrives wholly and appropriately, and provides eternal good existence through its own participation, as the only one who truly is, and always is, and is well; but to those who have used the reason of existing against nature with their will, instead of 'well', it fittingly assigns 'always ill', as the 'existing well' is no longer graspable for them, being disposed contrarily toward it, and having no motion at all after the manifestation of the sought object, according to which it is natural for the sought to be manifested to those who seek it,

Another contemplation on the same subject.

Another contemplation on the same subject.

From the same discourse, in what way the master, taking that which is said: "Duplicate and triplicate," speaks regarding the mystery of the seventh: "As also the seventh turning of the prophet Elijah, which breathed life into the son of the Sareptan widow, and the rainfall—equal in number—upon the timbers."

The blessed elder, being asked this by me, said, "In this place, it is perhaps possible to see that the teacher has directed a conjecture regarding the septenary number. First, according to those skilled in the art of arithmetic. For they teach that certain numbers consist of others being doubled and tripled, with the unit added at the end. Thus, the number 64 consists of doubled numbers, the unit being doubled along with the six numbers, and the unit being added at the end, by which reason the septenary number is completed; for twice two is 4, twice 4 is 8, twice 8 is 16, twice 16 is 32, twice 32 is 64. So these, having been formed through six numbers, appear to be composed, but the unit taken at the end, from which the beginning of the doubling was made, completes the seven. Therefore, in the same way here also, following the same rule, we complete the septenary number. For he says, 'Pour out, duplicate and triplicate.' Thus, twice one is 2, and three times 2 is 6, and the first unit added to the six completes the seven number. They also teach that there is a certain spiritual kinship, according to mystical contemplation, between the number three and the number seven, in this way: that the most holy and adorable Trinity is signified by the number three, and again the same by the number seven, in that the number seven is virgin." For 1 Reg. XVII, 21.

^A within the decade of numbers, this alone neither generates nor is generated. This is clearly demonstrated by one who examines it in the book written in verse *On Virginity*, saying: "The first virgin is the holy Trinity."

Another contemplation on the same.

^B Or in this way: When, with the holy Trinity, one mystically contemplates in one’s mind its virtue—I mean the Good, which represents the four general virtues—one will complete the number seven. For when we mystically contemplate the activity of the holy and all-hymned Trinity, we perfect the number seven as a virgin.

From the same discourse, on the text: "Jesus himself, who is pure perfection, knows how to feed five thousand men in the desert with five loaves, and again four thousand with seven; and the remnants of the bounty were there twelve baskets, but here seven hampers." Neither, I think, was done rashly, nor otherwise than worthy of the Spirit.

Having already trained the mind towards a contemplative habit in those matters which, as far as was possible, have been discussed at length, and which have already anticipated the abundance of words, if it seems good, let us not burden it further, but rather, as it is now capable of receiving the contemplation of divine things expertly and in summary, let us so proceed. The five barley loaves, therefore, signify the clear-sighted principles of natural contemplation. But the five thousand men who are fed by them in the desert signify those who are indeed moved towards nature, but are ^C not yet entirely purified from the affective, irrational part of the soul, nor from their relative disposition. For it is taught to us in these contemplations that they are loaves of barley, a type of grain that is food for beasts as well as for men, and that it was with women and children. This clearly shows that they were not yet entirely alienated from voluptuous desires and from the infantile and vain stupidity of thoughts. The desert, indeed, is this world, in which to those who are moved towards God through natural contemplation, the Word of God, breaking the principles of nature spiritually, grants every fullness of good things, as is taught by the baskets of remnants, twelve in number.

Contemplation on the number twelve.

The number twelve signifies temporal and natural principles, as it is completed by the composition of five and seven. For time is hebdomadic, as it revolves in a cycle, ^D and because it has a natural aptitude for motion, measuring the extremes from the center according to this number.

^A equal distance. The quinary is indeed a nature so arranged that it falls under this number, both because of the sense, which is divided in a fivefold way, and because matter, which is called simple and is divided in a fourfold way, has a superior form. For nature is nothing other than matter with form, or formed matter. For form added to matter creates nature.

Another contemplation on the same topic.

It signifies the thoughts of things that are created and those that are eternal, insofar as they are moved and circumscribed, and receive the reason for their being, their quality, and their mode. For everything that is movable and created exists, and therefore it cannot be but that it is subject to time, even if it is not that which is measured by motion. For everything that is created has a beginning of existence, inasmuch as it entered into existence, and likewise a distance or space from which it began to exist. But if everything created both exists and moves, it is necessary that it also falls under nature and time: under the former because of its existence, and under the latter because of its motion; when these are combined, the reason for the number twelve is completed in the way I have indicated.

Another contemplation.

This number denotes moral, natural, and theological philosophy, as it is composed of four, five, and three. The quaternary represents the philosophy that is accurate in its morals regarding things, because of the four general virtues. The quinary represents natural contemplation for the reason mentioned, I mean the sense, which is naturally divided in a fivefold way. The ternary represents mystical theology, because of the three holy coessential hypostases of the most holy Trinity, or in which is the holy Trinity, or, to speak more correctly, which is the holy Trinity.

Another contemplation.

It signifies the universal and most general virtue and knowledge: the one perfected here through the four virtues, the other ^C mystically indicating the more divine state of future things through the eight, from which the number twelve is formed by synthesis.

Another contemplation.

It signifies present and future things, because present things naturally receive the quaternary—the elementary and material number—while future things mystically claim for themselves the octonary, regarded in itself, inasmuch as it has the property to transcend the hebdomadic condition of time. ^D

^A Another contemplation. The number twelve clearly signifies the three-fold accounts of judgment and providence regarding the intelligible and sentient realms. For each of these, in and of itself—and this is what constitutes the three—admits of accounts of being, as has become clear to those who are mystics and initiates of divine things through much exercise in the oracles and much profound study. Therefore, the general three-fold accounts of existing things, when tripled by the four things in which existents are considered (or, conversely, when those to which they belong are quadrupled), constitute the number twelve. For if existing things possess essence, power, and activity, they possess a three-fold account of being that is clearly attributed to them. And if providence links these accounts to being—clearly in the way in which it is providence—then its account also must necessarily be three-fold. And if judgment, which acts as a chastisement for wickedness, is the corruption of each of the aforementioned accounts—past, present, and future—it, too, possesses a three-fold account of contemplation, by which, while defining the essence, power, and activity of existing things, it keeps its own boundlessness preserved in perpetuity.

^C [(258 a)] Another contemplation. Or again, this number signifies the perfect knowledge attainable by1 us of the Cause and the things that proceed from another as from a cause. For a dyad added to a decad makes the number twelve; and the decad is Jesus, the Lord and God of all things, in that, having proceeded from the Monad, he nonetheless did not go forth externally, but reverted again to himself and the Monad. For the Monad is also the Decad, and acts as the limit of things defined, the encompassment of those that incline, and the goal of all arithmetical termination. And the dyad, again, is the joining together of all things that are after God; for instance, all sentient things, as consisting of matter and form, are a dyad, and so also are intelligible things, as a gathering of power and that which essentially informs them. For absolutely nothing that is generated is strictly simple, in such a way that it is only this or that; rather, as in a subject, it possesses within its essence a constitutive and definitive difference, which is contemplated along with it, and while establishing it as that very thing, also clearly distinguishes it from another. Nothing, therefore, that is seen in any way as possessed of its own existence can be strictly simple.

^D Another contemplation. Or again, this number cryptically signifies the divine essence and its active power. The divine essence is indicated by the number three, as being celebrated triadically on account of the three-hypostatic existence—for the Monad is a Trinity.

^A properly in terms of its essence, that is to say, as regards the definition of being. But as for the active power indicated through the number six—since it is the only number within the decad that is perfect and full, and is composed of its own proper parts, and is comprehensive of both the general and unequal numbers, I mean the even and the odd—it signifies, as the only perfect number among the perfect, the law according to which it is both operative and preservative. For unequal are those things which move between the extremities toward the ever-moving station of the extremities. Just so that I might, for the diligent, take an example from the one and the others, one extremity is this: "And God said, Let us make man in our image and after our likeness" ^B; and the middle is this: "And God made man, male and female He made them"; and again the extremity: "For in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female." Since, therefore, the extremities and the middle are unequal—for the former possess "male and female," while the latter does not—the divine power is both operative and comprehensive. The wisest Moses, mystically initiated into this, as I believe, and benignly indicating it to the rest of mankind, wrote that God created the whole world in six days; by contemplating in order and structure within this power, together with the providence and the judgment of existing things (for these things are contained within it), we complete the most full number of twelve.

Contemplation on the baskets

The Word calls the baskets in which the remnants were stored the pedagogical dispensation ^C of those who have been spiritually nourished by the intellectual accounts of the things mentioned, because they have not yet surpassed the pedagogical instruction which both duly provides what is useful and proposes a painful way of life for those being so instructed; this is how it bids us understand the material from which the baskets are constructed, which by its nature is fashioned for striking and wounding.

Contemplation on the seven loaves

The seven loaves of the four thousand, as I suspect, prefigure the legal ^D mystagogy, or rather the more divine accounts according to it, which the Word mystically bestows upon those who remain for three days with the Word—that is, those who with patience endure the wearisome effort concerning moral, natural, and theological philosophy, through which the light of knowledge is prepared.

Another contemplation concerning the three days

The three days perhaps signify the natural, the written, and the spiritual law, since each...

^A one who labors diligently provides the illumination of the Word according to Him, where those who hunger well and truly for divine things, adhering blamelessly to God and the Word, receive mystical nourishment, which at the same time bears the symbol of victory and of the kingdom; the remnants of the filling. For the seven baskets, having their material from palm branches (for the palm is the symbol of victory and of the kingdom), and furthermore, of an unshakable stance against the incursions of violent spirits for the sake of the truth, show those who have been nourished through them to be victors over all wickedness and ignorance, as having received from God the Word an invincible mastery over the passions and demons.

Contemplation of the number of the four thousand men.

And the number of those very ones who were nourished by these ^B spiritual reasons is a manifest and rich witness of their true perfection, inasmuch as it contains four general units, of which the first is the first monad, the second monad is the decad, the third monad is the hundreds, and the fourth monad is the thousands. For each of these, excepting the first monad, is both a monad and a decad: a monad of those that follow after it, as it is composed into itself and by decupling forms its own decad; but a decad, as it gathers into itself the composition of those units that are before it; and the thousand, being quadrupled, brings into being the four thousand. Therefore, the first monad is a symbol of mystical theology, the second monad ^C is an image of divine providence and goodness, the third monad is a likeness of virtue and knowledge, and the fourth monad is a manifestation of the more divine regeneration of the whole of existing things.

Another contemplation on the number seven.

The number seven of the baskets, when viewed in another way according to the previous one, as they say, signifies wisdom and prudence: the former as moving in a threefold way in the mind concerning the Cause, and the latter as moving in a fourfold way concerning those things that are after the Cause and around the Cause, according to the reason provided by the Cause. Neither, therefore, was done irrationally by the Lord according to this great teacher, nor unworthily of the Spirit.

From the same discourse, on the text: ^D "And there is a diversity of gifts, [yet] another gift is needed to discern which is more excellent (66)."

The diversity of gifts which has need of another gift for discernment, according to this great teacher, is prophecy, as I suppose, and speaking in tongues. For prophecy has need of the grace of the discerning of spirits, in order to know who, and from whence, and whither it leads, and of what sort the spirit is.

and for what cause, lest perhaps it be empty chatter, only rashly brought forth out of the vice of the ^A governing faculty of the heart of him who speaks, or a spontaneous impulse of him who supposedly prophesies, reckoning things out of mere sagacity from the experience of many things naturally according to reason, or [it be] of a wicked and demoniacal spirit, as is the monstrous speech in the guise of prophecy found in Montanus and those similar to him; or lest one, for the sake of vain glory, adorn himself with the things of others as it may happen, speaking magnificently and boasting of things which he himself did not bring forth, lying for the sake of causing admiration, and having no shame at all that he is the spurious father of orphan words and thoughts, in order that he may seem to be someone wise. ^B For "Let two or three prophets speak," says the divine Apostle, "and let the others judge" (I Cor. xiv, 29). And who are "the others"? Clearly, those who possess the gift of the discerning of spirits. Thus prophecy, as I said, has need of the discerning of spirits, so that it may be known and believed and approved; and the gift of tongues has need of the gift of interpretation, so that such a person may not appear to the bystanders to be insane, since none of those who hear can follow what is being said. For "if," says the great Apostle, "you speak in tongues, and an unbeliever or the unlearned enters, will they not say that you are insane?" (I Cor. xiv, 23). And he commands that he who speaks in tongues ^C should rather be silent, unless there is one to interpret. But regarding the phrase "For the discerning of the better," the master says, those whose minds have been illuminated by divine teachings say that the gift of prophecy and that of tongues are superior to those gifts which they require for [the sake of] discernment and clarification—that is, [they are superior to] the discerning of spirits and [the gift of] interpretation. Knowing this, the teacher said, "For the discerning of the better."

By the same, from the discourse to Heron the philosopher, on the phrase: "Symbamata and parasymbamata."

"Symbaina," according to the grammarians, is a proposition composed of a noun and a verb, ^D forming a complete thought, as for instance, "John walks." "Parasymbama," however, is a proposition composed of a noun and verb not forming a complete thought, as "John is concerned." Thus, when someone says, "John walks," he shows that there is no need of anything else; but when he says, "John is concerned," he has omitted to say what it is that concerns him.

By the same, from the funeral oration on Saint Basil, on the phrase: "In nothing, therefore, of all things does it otherwise happen but that it receives an increase from that which is praised."

What one receives as honorable, for that same thing, entirely and...

clearly he rejoices and is encouraged. For he rejoices being increased in soul toward it as a beloved thing, and is encouraged toward a greater increase of it, receiving from the praise bestowed upon him a greater incentive. "For if," says the master, "I know the praises, of these I clearly know also the increases," that is to say: those things whose praises I know, and the increases in virtue—that is, the growth—of the men who accept them, these I understand. For truly, of none of the things that are praised is there anyone who would not entirely find the increase for those who delight in them. Or, since the master set forth three things above—himself, the discourses, and those who praise virtue—he encompassed them in this way and set them forth after the manner of rhetoricians, applying the inductions to these three things. He began by speaking of himself before the conclusion, then passing through those who praise virtue in the middle, he brought them to completion in the discourses; seeing that the argument, ^B adapted to Saint Basil, was fitting for him as master, for the proposal of the discourse, and for the lovers of virtue—or his praisers—desiring what they desire to know: the modes of increase in virtue taken through imitation, and consistent with the discourses themselves, as being heralds of the goods of virtue. For of the life of any man adorned by what is praiseworthy according to God, and especially that of Basil the Great, whether they are able to encompass everything and, as it were, present to the lovers of virtue a living and ensouled image, or whether they are unable to penetrate to the magnitude of this, there is in no matter at all—of everything consisting of the discourse, the speaker, and the hearer—any other outcome than that it suitably participates in the ornament of the argument, just as it was examined more accurately a little above.

From the same, out of his poems, on that which says: "For the supreme Reason plays with all-varied forms, discerning each one's world from this side and that."

^C When the mind, passing as if through certain gates of visible things to intellectual ones by faith alone in the Spirit, the great David received from divine wisdom a certain understanding of the mysteries permitted to human reach, then, I think, he says: "Abyss calls to abyss at the voice of thy cataracts" (Ps. XLI, 8). By these words perhaps signifying every contemplative mind—because it is naturally invisible and, on account of the depth and multitude of thoughts, like an abyss—after it has passed through the whole constitution and order of visible things and arrived at the region of intellectual things, and through faith has again transcended their beauty by the vehemence of its motion ^D

^A fixed entirely and immovable, on account of having passed through all things, he then fittingly invokes the divine Wisdom, which is in truth and reality an abyss impassable by knowledge [261 C], that It might deign to give him the voice of the divine cataracts, yet not the cataracts themselves—which is to say, to obtain through prayer a certain sign of the faith, through which we might know the modes and reasons of the divine Providence regarding the universe—that he might be able to remember God from the land of Jordan and Hermoniim, in which the great and fearful mystery of the divine condescension of the Word of God to men was accomplished through the flesh, in which the true piety toward God was bestowed upon men, [a mystery] which, since it has transcended every order and power of nature, was called by Paul, the great apostle, the divine priest and interpreter of the hidden things of the divine wisdom, the "foolishness of God" and the "weakness of God," on account, I think, of its superabundant wisdom and power; and it was called "play" ^B by the divinely-minded and great Gregory, on account of its superabundant prudence. For the one says: "The foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;" while the other, on the contrary, says: "For the supreme Reason plays in manifold forms, / Distinguishing its own world as it wills, from here and from there." Each of them, by the negation of the positive terms that we use, indicates the divine habit, and through the denials of our terms, affirms the divine realities. For among us, foolishness, weakness, and play are privations—the one of wisdom, the second of power, the third of prudence—but when spoken of God, they clearly signify the superabundance of wisdom, power, and prudence. ^C If, therefore, anything is spoken of among us by way of privation, it is just to understand it as signifying a habit when applied to God; and conversely, if anything is said of us by way of a habit, it is most consistent to teach that, when applied to God, it signifies a privation on account of His eminence. For the superabundances of divine things, even when spoken of by us by way of privation through contradiction, fall far short of the true meaning according to which they exist. But if this is true according to the probable argument (for divine things never at any time coincide with human things), then the "foolishness of God" and "weakness" according to the holy apostle Paul, and the "play of God" according to Gregory, the admirable and great teacher, is the mystery of the divine incarnation, as that which has supernaturally exceeded ^D every order and harmony of every nature, power, and operation; which the most divine David, having contemplated from afar by the divine Spirit in his mind and having been initiated, and, as it were, interpreting the superabundant habit of God spoken of by the Apostle through privation, clearly, I think, shouting about the Jews: "In the multitude of thy strength," he says, "thine enemies shall lie to thee."* For every man who ignorantly and impiously encloses God within the law of nature becomes openly an enemy and liar to God, and [does not believe] that He who, without any affection, has essentially surpassed nature in things subject to nature, is able to perform things according to nature as all..

^A things might be possible, does not make a beginning of believing [that He has done so]. Thus, therefore, according to one way of interpreting it, the discourse has dared to conjecture regarding the foolishness, the weakness, and the sport of God, with which—by way of digression, as a preliminary contemplation of the question set forth—it has taken the abyss calling out to the abyss into the voice of the divine cataracts. The discourse, invoking this gnostic mind as wisdom, has interpreted it and produced a certain slight intimation of the mysteries that are present in the divine and ineffable condescension. For "abyss" and the "place of the abyss" are called by a common name; but the place of divine wisdom is the pure mind. Therefore, because the abyss is fit for receiving, it is called positively both mind and, in turn, wisdom, on account of its own nature. ^B

Another contemplation on the same.

By the help of divine grace, we dare to approach the question proposed in another way, conjecturally, not affirmingly (for the former is modest, the latter is impudent), establishing that the state of intermediate things, having an equal distance from the extremes, has been called a sport of God by the great doctor, on account of their fluctuating and mutable state, or rather, what is more properly said, on account of their stable fluctuation. And this is even a matter of wonder: to see a state always fluctuating and slipping, and a fluctuation always ^C moving, divinely devised for the sake of amending those things which are administered, things which might be able to instruct and lead those who are instructed to wisdom, so that they might transfer their hope to be placed elsewhere, and at the end of it, in the very inclination of the mystery toward God, they might believe they will be firmly deified through grace. By "intermediate things," I mean those which even now seem to accompany man, or things in which man exists; by "extremes," on the other hand, I mean the substance of things not seen nor apparent, which most certainly will one day accompany man, which have been instituted ^D and made properly and truly according to the ineffable and principal end and reason of divine goodness. Just as the wise Ecclesiastes, turning the great and clear eye of the soul toward the generation of things that are seen and fluctuate, and being as it were in a vision of those things which strictly are created and made, says: "What is that which has been?" and: "What is that which has been made? That very thing which shall be." He is mindful, clearly, of those things which are in the beginning and which are in the end, as being the same and truly existing, whereas of those things which are in the middle and pass away, he makes no mention there at all. For after the master, in the way that he was especially able, discussed with great nobility concerning a certain peculiar nature of animals and stones, and simply concerning many of the infinite things that are observed in existing objects, he adds to these: "For the Word plays deeply in form

^A in every way, deciding whatever He wills for the world here and there." Might it not be, then, as he himself says in his sermon on Holy Pentecost, discussing God and the created nature: "As long as each remains in its own proper state—God, that is, in His own watchtower, and man in his own humility—neither will goodness be mingled nor will benevolence be shared, but there will be a great and impassable chasm in the middle, not one [Luc. xvi, 24] that separates the rich man from Lazarus and the desired bosom of Abraham, but one that separates all generated and flowing nature from the ungenerated and stable?"

Similar and related things to these does the great herald of God, Dionysius the Areopagite, also set forth, saying: "And one must dare to say this also for the sake of the truth, that the very Source and Cause of all things, through His excessive ^B loving goodness and the love that all things have for the beautiful and good, goes out of Himself in His providences for all existing things, and is, as it were, charmed by this goodness and charity and love; and, while being above all things and exempt from all things and from all, He is brought to be in all, according to an ecstatic and supernatural power that does not desert Him."

Perhaps, therefore, as I said, it is possible for us to explain the meaning of that "For the Word plays," which I have briefly set forth, in such a way, by these considerations also: Just as parents (to use examples from our own life to delineate things that surpass us), in order to shake off the sluggishness of their children, ^C accommodate themselves in a mode of condescension and appear to follow childish games—as, for example, playing with nuts, or keeping them company with dice—or even by setting before them flowers distinct in the variety of their colors and garments dyed in various hues, which soothe the senses, they first divert or astonish the children, who are not yet occupied with any other work, but shortly after they hand them over to lessons, then pass on to them a more complete reason and instruction in their own proper affairs; so, perhaps, does the Teacher, through the said words, also [lead] us—just as young children, since we are not yet occupied with ^D the investigation of things—by using the historical nature of the perceived, visible creatures as a means to astonish or even divert us through the sight and knowledge of them, now casting us, as it were, into wonder, then also introducing the contemplation of the more spiritual reasons within them, and finally leading us, as far as is attainable, to the more mystical knowledge of Himself through theology—a knowledge that is utterly pure from all form, and quality, and species, and quantity, and from both multitude and mass, and from the variety and composition [found] in our preparatory lessons, so that we may reach the end of contemplation, which has been called "playing" by the God-bearing Gregory, and "being charmed" and "going out of oneself" by the God-bearing Dionysius. For in truth, the things present and visible, when viewed alongside those which are properly and truly existing, and those which in the future

^A they appear, when placed and compared, to be a childish game; nay, this seems to be even more than that. For when the order of present and visible things is compared with the truth of truly divine and primordial realities, it will not appear to be reality at all to those who—according to the measure of their capacity—have been deemed worthy to grasp the beauty of the divine splendor, just as a childish game is not considered to be comparable in any way to a true and certain business.

Another contemplation on the same subject

Perhaps, too, the degenerate and mutable nature of material things—which we entrust to one another, transferring and being transferred, and having no stable foundation except for the primary reason by which they are wisely and providently driven and drive—is rightly called a childish game of God by the master. [This is] because, while we think we possess them, they flee rather than are mastered; and they repel our desire, which strives to possess them, as if [these things] could not be mastered or master [anything] at all, existing only with the stable boundary of their own nature: ^B that they flow away and do not stand. Thus, the master rightly calls them a childish game of God, as by these things He leads us toward those which truly exist and never fluctuate.

Another contemplation on the same subject

But if we ourselves, too, according to the consequence of our nature which prevails for the present, are first born in a manner equal to other animals of the earth, then become little children, and then with our youth hastening to the wrinkles of old age, die—like a falling flower—and are translated to another life, we have been rightly called a "game of God" by this divine teacher. For when the present life is compared to the future archetype of divine and true life, it is a game, and whatever else exists lack more of essence and truth than this. This the master demonstrates more clearly in his funeral oration on Caesarius with these words: "Such is our life, brothers, we who lead a fleeting life; such is the game on earth: that we are born when we do not exist, and when we are born, we are dissolved again. We are a dream that does not stand, a certain specter that cannot be held, the flight of a passing bird, a ship having no trace on the sea, dust, vapor, ^C morning dew, a flower born in a moment and in a moment withering; man is like grass, his days are as the flower of the field, so shall he blossom." ^D Beautifully did the divine David philosophize about our weakness with these words.

These are the places in the sermons of our great Father and teacher Gregory about which you inquired, most blessed ones, and which you asked me to expound to the best of my ability. ^A Yielding, as is proper, to your desire, I have discoursed by way of conjecture rather than by affirmation. For our intellect does not reach or attain to the great and sublime mind of the God-bearing teacher, while we are still pierced by the voluntary stings of the passions, in whose wounds the one who is struck delights more than the one who is purified by the graces of the virtues, having acquired a habit prone to sin on account of long-standing custom in evil. And if these questions appear to you to possess any argument worthy of the subject, and one not entirely alien to the truth, glory be to God, who enlightened a lowly and cast-down mind (so that He might bring about even this miracle) and granted a fitting measure of speech by His grace, so that what you envisioned might fit and be in harmony with the writings we committed to paper, for your benefit as well, you who gave the command and inaugurated the entire work with the help of your prayers. ^B “But even if I have wandered, wrongly or imperfectly, and whether entirely or in part, from the truth” (for I bring forth to you the great and divinely-inspired Dionysius as a consoler in this matter also), “it would be for your humanity, I pray, to correct him who is unwittingly and unintentionally in ignorance, and to instruct from your own store him who desires and prays to be instructed, and to be a protection to him who does not have sufficient strength, and to bring medicine to him who does not wish to be sick, so that you may offer this also with the rest of your good deeds, or rather before the rest, ^C as a precious offering and one more venerable than every sacrifice, namely, humanity to God, who is glorified in heaven and on earth by every creature, and who requires from us only this sacrifice: humanity towards one another.”

Saint Maximus’s Scholia on Blessed Dionysius the Areopagite exist among the works of the Areopagite himself, in Tome IV of this Patrologia; his Ecclesiastical Computation, however, we have provided among the supplements to Eusebius’s Chronicle, Tome XIX, col. 1217.

HYMNS OF SAINT MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR

I.

A Hymn of Thanksgiving and Supplication to God

A meadow once held me, blessed, Of excellent plants, By the ineffable providence And equal love of God Most High, I beheld this light, Fashioned from the clay of the earth, And possessing, moreover, a spirit,